Content validity and readability of patient-reported questionnaire instruments of hearing disability

Vinaya Manchaiah, Sarah Granberg, Vibhu Grover, Gabrielle Saunders, Deborah Ann Hall

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective: This study evaluates the content validity (i.e. domains assessed) and readability levels of patient-reported questionnaire instruments using internationally recognised procedures and tools. Design: A review of the literature to identify candidate instruments and a synthesis of information including mapping extracted items onto the World Health Organisation’s–International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (WHO-ICF) and estimating readability. Study sample: 14 patient-reported questionnaire instruments. Results: In general, item content focussed on body function and on activity limitations and participation restrictions, with less emphasis on environmental and personal factors and with different emphases across instruments. Many items did not clearly map onto any of the WHO-ICF categories (i.e. not coded items ranged from 3.7 to 39.1% across the 14 questionnaires). All 14 instruments exceeded the sixth-grade reading level when calculated according to the FORCAST formula which is appropriate for assessing a non-narrative text. Conclusions: Clinical assessment of hearing disability is only as comprehensive as the items covered by the chosen measurement instrument. Our findings confirmed the diversity of domains covered by hearing disability instruments and gaps in assessment. Some concern is raised about whether the item content is appropriate for those respondents with poor literacy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalInternational journal of audiology
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Hearing
disability
questionnaire
health
Health
Reading
measurement method
Surveys and Questionnaires
Readability
Questionnaire
candidacy
literacy
participation
Global Health

Keywords

  • content validity
  • Hearing disability
  • hearing loss
  • patient-reported questionnaire
  • readability

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Language and Linguistics
  • Linguistics and Language
  • Speech and Hearing

Cite this

Content validity and readability of patient-reported questionnaire instruments of hearing disability. / Manchaiah, Vinaya; Granberg, Sarah; Grover, Vibhu; Saunders, Gabrielle; Ann Hall, Deborah.

In: International journal of audiology, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{3ab36b4f9e6f4d2f93cb8895f5e78438,
title = "Content validity and readability of patient-reported questionnaire instruments of hearing disability",
abstract = "Objective: This study evaluates the content validity (i.e. domains assessed) and readability levels of patient-reported questionnaire instruments using internationally recognised procedures and tools. Design: A review of the literature to identify candidate instruments and a synthesis of information including mapping extracted items onto the World Health Organisation’s–International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (WHO-ICF) and estimating readability. Study sample: 14 patient-reported questionnaire instruments. Results: In general, item content focussed on body function and on activity limitations and participation restrictions, with less emphasis on environmental and personal factors and with different emphases across instruments. Many items did not clearly map onto any of the WHO-ICF categories (i.e. not coded items ranged from 3.7 to 39.1{\%} across the 14 questionnaires). All 14 instruments exceeded the sixth-grade reading level when calculated according to the FORCAST formula which is appropriate for assessing a non-narrative text. Conclusions: Clinical assessment of hearing disability is only as comprehensive as the items covered by the chosen measurement instrument. Our findings confirmed the diversity of domains covered by hearing disability instruments and gaps in assessment. Some concern is raised about whether the item content is appropriate for those respondents with poor literacy.",
keywords = "content validity, Hearing disability, hearing loss, patient-reported questionnaire, readability",
author = "Vinaya Manchaiah and Sarah Granberg and Vibhu Grover and Gabrielle Saunders and {Ann Hall}, Deborah",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/14992027.2019.1602738",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "International Journal of Audiology",
issn = "1499-2027",
publisher = "Informa Healthcare",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Content validity and readability of patient-reported questionnaire instruments of hearing disability

AU - Manchaiah, Vinaya

AU - Granberg, Sarah

AU - Grover, Vibhu

AU - Saunders, Gabrielle

AU - Ann Hall, Deborah

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Objective: This study evaluates the content validity (i.e. domains assessed) and readability levels of patient-reported questionnaire instruments using internationally recognised procedures and tools. Design: A review of the literature to identify candidate instruments and a synthesis of information including mapping extracted items onto the World Health Organisation’s–International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (WHO-ICF) and estimating readability. Study sample: 14 patient-reported questionnaire instruments. Results: In general, item content focussed on body function and on activity limitations and participation restrictions, with less emphasis on environmental and personal factors and with different emphases across instruments. Many items did not clearly map onto any of the WHO-ICF categories (i.e. not coded items ranged from 3.7 to 39.1% across the 14 questionnaires). All 14 instruments exceeded the sixth-grade reading level when calculated according to the FORCAST formula which is appropriate for assessing a non-narrative text. Conclusions: Clinical assessment of hearing disability is only as comprehensive as the items covered by the chosen measurement instrument. Our findings confirmed the diversity of domains covered by hearing disability instruments and gaps in assessment. Some concern is raised about whether the item content is appropriate for those respondents with poor literacy.

AB - Objective: This study evaluates the content validity (i.e. domains assessed) and readability levels of patient-reported questionnaire instruments using internationally recognised procedures and tools. Design: A review of the literature to identify candidate instruments and a synthesis of information including mapping extracted items onto the World Health Organisation’s–International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (WHO-ICF) and estimating readability. Study sample: 14 patient-reported questionnaire instruments. Results: In general, item content focussed on body function and on activity limitations and participation restrictions, with less emphasis on environmental and personal factors and with different emphases across instruments. Many items did not clearly map onto any of the WHO-ICF categories (i.e. not coded items ranged from 3.7 to 39.1% across the 14 questionnaires). All 14 instruments exceeded the sixth-grade reading level when calculated according to the FORCAST formula which is appropriate for assessing a non-narrative text. Conclusions: Clinical assessment of hearing disability is only as comprehensive as the items covered by the chosen measurement instrument. Our findings confirmed the diversity of domains covered by hearing disability instruments and gaps in assessment. Some concern is raised about whether the item content is appropriate for those respondents with poor literacy.

KW - content validity

KW - Hearing disability

KW - hearing loss

KW - patient-reported questionnaire

KW - readability

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85065203059&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85065203059&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/14992027.2019.1602738

DO - 10.1080/14992027.2019.1602738

M3 - Article

JO - International Journal of Audiology

JF - International Journal of Audiology

SN - 1499-2027

ER -