ArticleBMC medical education2025
Psychometric properties of the questionnaire for educational justice assessment-student perspective (QEJA-SP) as a reliable tool to inform managers about students' perceptions.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAssessing educational justice (EJ) and its observance has been documented among the main goals in education systems, but no proper tools have been thus far developed to act in this way. Against this background, the present study was to design a questionnaire to assess EJ from the perspective of students and then evaluate its psychometric properties.
methodsThe Questionnaire for Educational Justice Assessment: Student Perspective (QEJA-SP) contained 42 items, constructed by reviewing the related literature and interviews. To determine the sample size, a 5:1 ratio was further considered. Given that 210 questionnaires were required, 231 cases were distributed among the participants in consideration of their dropout. During data analysis, 17 questionnaires were also excluded due to their incompleteness. To measure the validity of the tool of interest, qualitative and quantitative face validity and content validity, viz., content validity index (CVI) and content validity ratio (CVR), were utilized. Construct validity was then evaluated using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA).Upon confirming the validity, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and internal consistency were applied, using Cronbach's alpha, in order to establish the reliability of the questionnaire.
resultsThe CVR and CVI values were found to be greater than 0.62 and 0.7, respectively. As well, the EFA resulted in a model with the total variance explained (TVE) of 69.144. CFA significantly demonstrated the validity and accuracy of the tool's results, providing further confidence in its accuracy and effectiveness.The Cronbach's alpha and test-retest reliability values of the entire questionnaire were equal to 0.946 and 0.956, in that order. The final questionnaire, the QEJA-SP, accordingly comprised of 36 items and eight dimensions, including "justice in research" with the highest TVE = 15.157% and "classroom capacity" with the lowest value = 3.924%.
conclusionWith regard to the acceptable psychometric properties of the QEJA-SP, fitting the academic environments and the target population of students, this tool could help education managers and policymakers at universities and institutes of higher education (IHEs) to learn about students' expectations and perceptions, and then evaluate the existing situation in their affiliated centers in terms of EJ fulfillment.
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.