ArticleScientific reports2024
Content validity of the questionnaire considering opinions of the Finnish physicians on euthanasia and assisted suicide.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite numerous surveys conducted across the world considering assisted death, content validity evaluations of the survey questionnaires are seldom published. Likewise, there is no previous research about the content validity of the survey "Finnish physicians´ attitudes and opinions on euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide" conducted by the Finnish Medical Association. The aim of this study was to assess the content validity of the survey questionnaire. To study this, a purposive sample of physicians was recruited. Firstly, the participants were interviewed to bring up their interpretations and assessments considering the relevance, comprehensibility, and measurement scale suitability of the questions. Secondly, the participants assessed the revised study questionnaire. Altogether 16 physicians participated in the study. Although the relevance and comprehensibility of the questions were assessed to be high-level, parallel interpretations of the contents were discovered. We suggest content validity research to be essential when developing a questionnaire on assisted death. Our results could be helpful when planning future surveys about this challenging topic.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.