SYSTEMATIC EVALUATION OF HEALTH QUESTIONNAIRE VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY: KNOWLEDGE AND PRACTICE OF PRAYER FOR HOSPITALISED MUSLIM PATIENTS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37268/mjphm/vol.24/no.3/art.2423Keywords:
Face validity, Content validity, construct validity, Reliability, QuestionnaireAbstract
The experience of pain presents a profound challenge to individuals due to its impact on their capacity for optimal functioning. Within the Islamic faith, the obligation to perform daily prayers persists regardless of the individual's health status, provided they are mentally capable. Despite physical limitations arising from health conditions, Muslims are required to maintain their prayer routines to the best of their ability. The present study seeks to validate an understanding and practice questionnaire for hospital patients with regard to Islamic prayer, employing processes of face validity, content validity, and construct validity. This study was conducted with the aim of developing an online patient prayer-learning module to help members of the public admitted to hospital to learn how to perform the prayer while being treated. Therefore, the development of a questionnaire was carried out to enable this study to receive feedback on the extent of the patient's knowledge and practice after using the patient's prayer application as a reference in performing worship. The development of the questionnaire used the Scale Development Study approach, which involves the development of questions that will then be verified in terms of construct and reliability to measure what is to be studied and measured.Face validity was assessed for both the 'knowledge' and 'practice' sections of the questionnaire. The semantic face validity index (S-FVI) and average variance extracted (AVE) for 'item suitability' in the 'knowledge' section were found to be 0.97, while 'sentence comprehension' achieved a score of 0.98. For the 'practice' section, 'item suitability' and 'sentence comprehension' scored 0.97 and 0.99, respectively, in S-FVI/AVE. Content validity was similarly evaluated for both questionnaire sections. The scale content validity index/average variance extracted (S-CVI/AVE) for 'item suitability' and 'sentence comprehension' in the 'knowledge' section scored 1 and 0.97, respectively. In the 'practice' section, 'item suitability' and 'sentence comprehension' both achieved a score of 1 in S-CVI.Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was utilised to identify subdomains in the knowledge and practice domains. The knowledge domain EFA revealed three subdomains, with nine items being retained. In contrast, the practice domain EFA showed that all items were maintained across three subdomains. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) demonstrated that all parameters met the prescribed indicator values for both knowledge and practice domains (Chisq/df<3, GFI (Goodness of Fit)>0.90, CFI (Comparative Fit Index)>0.90, RMSEA (The Root Mean Square Error) <0.08). The reliability of the questionnaire, as determined by the Cronbach's alpha, was 0.66 for the 'knowledge' section and 0.64 for the 'practice' section. Given these robust validity and reliability results, the developed questionnaire is deemed appropriate for use in the pilot study phase, subsequent to comprehensive validity evaluations.
References
al-Tirmidh M ibn sá ibn M. al-Jmi al-Kabr. 3rd ed. Bayrt: D?r al-Gharb al-Islm; 1996.
al-Bayhaq ABA ibn usayn. al-Sunan al-Kubr. 3rd ed. Bayr: Dr al-Kitb al-Ilmyah; 2003.
al-Rabw Abd al-Qdir. al-alh alá al-Madhhib al-Arbaah ma Adillah Akmih. al-Qhirah: Dr al-Salm
al-Suy Abd al-Ramn ibn Ab Bakr. al-Ashbh wa-al-Nair. 1st ed. Bayrt: Dr al-Kitb al-Ilmyah; 1990.
al-Qan S ibn Al ibn W. alt al-Mar f aw al-Kitb wa-al-Sunnah. al-Riy: Mu?assasah al-Jurays.
?Abd ?aytham zim. Akm alt al-mar. al-Ulm al-Islmyah. 2011;5(19):94–132.
Mbuagbaw L, Lawson DO, Puljak L, Allison DB, Thabane L. A tutorial on methodological studies: the what, when, how and why. BMC Med Res Methodol [Internet]. 2020 Sep 7 [cited 2023 Aug 21];20(1). Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32894052/
Binti Daud R, Johari S, Abdul-Hamid F, Junaini SN, Norazmi M, Pendidikan NF, et al. Face and Content Validity For The Special Education Leadership (Integration) Questionnaire In Malaysia. Vol. 12, Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education. 2021. Available from: https://www.turcomat.org/index.php/turkbilmat/article/view/6726
Bane HMF, Sheafer V, Rispin K. Face and content validity for the Wheelchair Satisfaction Questionnaire. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2021;16(5):545–9. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31726899/
Bolarinwa O. Principles and methods of validity and reliability testing of questionnaires used in social and health science research. Nigerian Postgraduate Medical Journal. 2015;22(4):195. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26776330/
Hamed Taherdoost A, Lumpur K. Validity and Reliability of the Research Instrument; How to Test the Validation of a Questionnaire/Survey in a Research [Internet]. Vol. 5, International Journal of Academic Research in Management (IJARM). 2016. Available from: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3205040
Aris MSM, Rani MDM, Jaafar MH, Norazmi A ‘Ubaidah A, Umar NS. Knowledge, attitude, and practice of performing prayers (Salat) among Muslim patients in hospital Langkawi, Kedah: Roles of muslim healthcare providers. Advanced Science Letters. 2017;23(5):4955–9. Available from: https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/asp/asl/2017/00000023/00000005/art00257
Mutmainnah Yusof N, Abdul Aziz F, Bahyah Mustafa K, Awang M, Rahman Abdullah A. Practice and Awareness of Salat Obligation during Hospital Admission among Female Muslim Patients in Obstetrics & Gynaecology. Vol. 08, Revelation and Science IIUM. 1439. Available from: https://journals.iium.edu.my/revival/index.php/revival/article/view/218
Ab al-Barakt M al D. al-Muarrar f al-fiqh alá madhhab al-Imm Amad ibn anbal. Cairo: Dar al-Kitab al-Arabi; 1995.
al-Balkh N al D. al-Fatwá al-Hindyah f madhhab al-Imm al-Aam Ab anfah al-Numn. 2nd ed. Bayrt: Dr al-dir; 1991.
Ibn al-Humm K al DM ibn Abd al W. Shar Fat al-Qadr alá al-Hidyah. 2nd ed. Bayrt: Dr al-Kitb al-Ilmyah; 2009.
al-Ksn Al al-Dn Ab Bakr ibn Masd. Badi al-ani f Tartb al-Shari. 1st ed. Bayrt: Dr al-Kitb al-Ilmyah; 2003.
al-Kharaš M ibn Abd A. Shar Mukhtaar Khall li-al-Kharaš. Bayrt: Dr al-Fikr;
al-Mardw Al ibn Sulaymn. al-Inf f Marifah al-Rji minal-Khilf. al-Urdun: Bayt al-Afkr al-Dawlyah; 2004.
al-Marghnn Al ibn Ab Bakr. al-Hidyah f Shar Bidyah al-Mubtad. Bayrt: Dr al-Arqm ibn Ab al-Arqm; 2008.
al-Maqdis M ibn M. Kitb al-Fur. al-Urdun: Bayt al-Afkr al-Dawlyah; 2004.
Ibn Mawdd al-Mawil Abd Allh ibn Mamd ibn Mawdd. al-Ikhtiyr li-Tall al-Mukhtr. 1st ed. Ammn: Dr al-Fikr; 1999.
al-Nawaw Y ibn S. al-Majm Shar al-Muhadhdhab. al-Urdun: Bayt al-Afkr al-Dawlyah; 2005.
al-Nawaw Y ibn S. Rawat al-libn wa-Umdat al-Muftn. 1st ed. Maktabat al-Islm; 1991.
al-Qurub A Umar Y ibn Abd A. al-Kf f Fiqh Ahl al-Madnah. 2nd ed. Bayrt: Dr al-Kitb al-Ilmyah; 2002.
al-Samarqand M ibn A. Tufat al-Fuqah. 1st ed. Bayrt: Dr al-Kitb al-Ilmyah; 1984.
al-Sarakhs M ibn A ibn AS. al-Mabs. Bayrt: Dr al-Marifah; 1993.
al-Shrz AI. al-Muhadhdhab. 1st ed. Dimashq: Dr al-Salm; 1996.
Ibn al-Munj Z al D al M ibn Uthmn ibn A. al-Mumti f Shar al-Muqni. 3rd ed. Maktabat al-Asad; 2003.
Ibn Muflih AIB al DI bin M bin A bin M. al-Mubdi’ Syarh al-Muqni’. Cetakan Pe. Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiah-Beirut, Lubnan; 1997.
Mlik M ibn A ibn M. al-Mudawwanah al-Kubrá. 1st ed. Bayrt: Dr al-Kitb al-Ilmyah; 1994.
al-Jawznah IMI, Ban Y Sn S Al J. ahrah al-Mar wa-altuh: Dirsah Qawidyah Tabqyah Muqranah. al-Majallah al-Urdunyah f al-Dirst al-Islmyah. 2016;12(4):61–105.
Ibn Qudmah Abd Allh ibn Amad ibn Muammad. al-Mughn. 1st ed. Sud: Dr lam al-Kitb; 1997.
al-abb ibn hir. al-Fiqh al-Mlik wa-Adillatuh. 5th ed. Bayrt: Muassasah al-Marif; 2007.
Tay L, Jebb AT. Scale Development Cultural and Intellectual Openness Differentially Relate to Social Judgments of Potential Work Partners View project Forecasting and Prediction View project. In: S. Rogelberg, editor. 2nd ed. The SAGE Encyclopedia of Industrial and Organizational Psychology; Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305462834
Polit DF, Beck CT, Owen S V. Focus on research methods: Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Res Nurs Health. 2007;30(4):459–67. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17654487/
Polit DF, Beck CT. The content validity index: Are you sure you know what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations. Res Nurs Health. 2006;29(5):489–97. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16977646/
Zainudin A. SEM Made Simple: A Gentle Approach to Learning Structural Equation Modeling. 1st ed. Bandar Baru Bangi: MPWS Rich Publication; 2015.
Rasudin NS, Shohaimi S, Hassan SA, Zainuddin H. A Validation Study of the Malay Version of the Job Stress Level Inventory. International Journal of Social Science Study. 2016;4(8). Available from: https://doi.org/10.11114/ijsss.v4i8.1660
Zalma AR, Safiah MY, Ajau D, Khairil Anuar MI. Reliability and validity of television food advertising questionnaire in Malaysia. Health Promot Int. 2015;30(3):523–30. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/dat072
Di Iorio CK. Measurement in health behaviour: methods for research evaluation. 1st ed. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass; 2005. 176–210 p.
