The judges were characterized through descriptive analysis (frequency distribution and measures of central tendency). The instrument data were analyzed using Cronbach’s alpha (α) and McDonald’s omega (Ω). Validity data were obtained from judges’ answers on a Likert scale and were analyzed for inter-judge reliability by the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), using the bilateral combined randomization model.
To measure the agreement among judges on the educational technology attributes, the Level Content Validity (CVI - Content Validity Index) was used, calculated in two procedures: Level Content Validity Index (I-CVI), which assessed the level of agreement among expert judges regarding each item, through the number of judges who rated the item as “totally agree” and “partially agree”, divided by the total number of judges; and Scale-Level Content Validity Index/Average Calculation Method (S-CVI/Ave), which calculated the mean I-CVI of the 22 assessed items as well as the mean I-CVI of items in each domain. Items with a level greater than 0.90 were considered valid
(19 (link)).
Data come from a master’s thesis in nursing and were tabulated in Microsoft Excel
®, analyzed using IBM SPSS
® Statistics, version 26.0 (International Business Machines Corporation, Armonk, New York, USA), and Jamovi
®, version 1.8. 4.0, adopting a significance level of 5% (p-value <0.05).
de Lima A.C., Cabral B.G., Capobiango J.D., Soares M.H., Pieri F.M, & Kerbauy G. (2023). “Educational Material on HIV”: validity of health educational technology for people living with HIV. Revista Brasileira de Enfermagem, 76(3), e20220549.