Author(s):
Sharad Desai, Nilesh Patel
Email(s):
nileshcology127@gmail.com
DOI:
10.52711/2321-5836.2021.00023 
Address:
Sharad Desai1, Nilesh Patel2*
1Ph.D Research Scholar, Ganpat University, Ganpat Vidyanagar-384012, Mehsana, Gujarat, India.
2Associate Professor and Head, Department of Pharmacology, Shree S. K. Patel College of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, Ganpat University, Ganpat Vidyanagar-384012, Mehsana, Gujarat, India.
*Corresponding Author
Published In:
Volume - 13,
Issue - 4,
Year - 2021
ABSTRACT:
Participation of humans in clinical research is always remained questionable. Hence evaluation of such doubt helps to conclude the perception about such participation. This research presents the process for development and validation of questionnaire for Healthy Adult Human Participants of Early Phase Bioequivalence Pharmacokinetic Endpoint Study. For development of questionnaire, literature search, experts’ discussion and authors’ experience was used for domain identification and its segregation for different variables. For validity of questionnaire, face validity and content validity was performed. Modification was done based on response from experts during non-quantitative face validity. % of overall agreement was 94.55 for question asked in face validity. While, Content Validity Ratio and Content Validity Index was calculated using the process mentioned by Lawshe and Lynn respectively. Initially 83 items were identified but based on validation 84 items were finalized after removal of three and addition of four questions. Deleted three items had Content Validity Ratio of 0.00, 0.67 and 0.67 and which were below accepted level of 0.99. While, I-CVI was observed from range of 0.83 to 1.00 and S-CVI values were above acceptable level of 0.90 for S-CVI (S-CVI/ Ave) and 0.80 for S-CVI (S-CVI/UA) for whole questionnaire and each part.
Cite this article:
Sharad Desai, Nilesh Patel. Development and Validity of Questionnaire for Healthy Adult Human Participants of Early Phase Bioequivalence Pharmacokinetic Endpoint Study. Research Journal of Pharmacology and Pharmacodynamics. 2021;13(4):111-7. doi: 10.52711/2321-5836.2021.00023
Cite(Electronic):
Sharad Desai, Nilesh Patel. Development and Validity of Questionnaire for Healthy Adult Human Participants of Early Phase Bioequivalence Pharmacokinetic Endpoint Study. Research Journal of Pharmacology and Pharmacodynamics. 2021;13(4):111-7. doi: 10.52711/2321-5836.2021.00023 Available on: https://rjppd.org/AbstractView.aspx?PID=2021-13-4-2
REFERENCES:
1. Robert Schall. Laszlo Endrenyi. Bioequivalence: tried and tested. Cardiovasc J Afr. 2010; 21(2): 69–70. PMC3721767
2. Robert J Hawkins. Barbara Swanson. Michael J Kremer. Lou Fogg. Content validity testing of questions for a patient satisfaction with general anesthesia care instrument. J Perianesth Nurs. 2014; 29(1): 28–35. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jopan.2013.05.011
3. Lynn M. R. Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research, 1986; 35(6): 382–385. http://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-198611000-00017
4. Oluwatayo. James Ayodele. Validity and reliability issues in educational research. Journal of Educational and Social Research. 2012; 2(2): 391-400. http://doi.org/10.5901/jesr.2012.v2n2.391
5. C. H. Lawshe. A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology. 1975; 28: 563-575.
6. Muhamad Saiful Bahri Yusoff. ABC of content validation and content validity index calculation. Education in Medicine Journal. 2019; 11(2): 49–54. https://doi.org/10.21315/eimj2019.11.2.6
7. Carolyn Waltz. Ora Lea Strickland. Elizabeth Lenz. Measurement in nursing and health research, 3rd Edition. 2005. New York: Springer.
8. Linda Lindsey Davis. Instrument review: Getting the most from a panel of experts. Applied Nursing Research. 1992; 5(4): 194-197. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0897-1897(05)80008-4