Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39505303›Full record

ArticleJournal of educational evaluation for health professions2024

Validation of the Blended Learning Usability Evaluation–Questionnaire (BLUE-Q) through an innovative Bayesian questionnaire validation approach

Anish Kumar Arora, Charo Rodriguez, Tamara Carver, Hao Zhang, Tibor Schuster

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of educational evaluation for health professions, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Anish Kumar AroraFamily Medicine Education Research Group, Department of Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada
Charo RodriguezFamily Medicine Education Research Group, Department of Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada
Tamara CarverInstitute of Health Sciences Education, Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada
Hao ZhangFamily Medicine Education Research Group, Department of Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada
Tibor SchusterFamily Medicine Education Research Group, Department of Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada

Funding

CIHRInstitute for Health Sciences Education
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe primary aim of this study is to validate the Blended Learning Usability Evaluation–Questionnaire (BLUE-Q) for use in the field of health professions education through a Bayesian approach. As Bayesian questionnaire validation remains elusive, a secondary aim of this article is to serve as a simplified tutorial for engaging in such validation practices in health professions education.

methodsA total of 10 health education-based experts in blended learning were recruited to participate in a 30-minute interviewer-administered survey. On a 5-point Likert scale, experts rated how well they perceived each item of the BLUE-Q to reflect its underlying usability domain (i.e., effectiveness, efficiency, satisfaction, accessibility, organization, and learner experience). Ratings were descriptively analyzed and converted into beta prior distributions. Participants were also given the option to provide qualitative comments for each item.

resultsAfter reviewing the computed expert prior distributions, 31 quantitative items were identified as having a probability of “low endorsement” and were thus removed from the questionnaire. Additionally, qualitative comments were used to revise the phrasing and order of items to ensure clarity and logical flow. The BLUE-Q’s final version comprises 23 Likert-scale items and 6 open-ended items.

conclusionQuestionnaire validation can generally be a complex, time-consuming, and costly process, inhibiting many from engaging in proper validation practices. In this study, we demonstrate that a Bayesian questionnaire validation approach can be a simple, resource-efficient, yet rigorous solution to validating a tool for content and item-domain correlation through the elicitation of domain expert endorsement ratings.

Indexed as

Bayes TheoremAdultEducational MeasurementFemaleHealth OccupationsHumansLearningReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesBayesian methodMedical educationProgram evaluationQuestionnaire designValidation study

Identifiers

PMID39505303
PMCPMC11894031

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.