Skip to main content

Table 2 Structured item development criteria used to assess quality of items

From: Development of the Health Literacy of Caregivers Scale - Cancer (HLCS-C): item generation and content validity testing

#

Criteria to assess item quality

Possible outcome

Acceptable outcome to retain item

1

How difficult is the item for respondents endorse the maximum score

Very difficult; Moderately difficult; Easy

All three possible outcomes. Author sought to develop constructs that contained items with a range of difficulty

2

How comprehensible is the item for caregivers with high and low literacy

Comprehensible; Contains words that may be difficult for caregivers to understand

Comprehensible

3

How relevant is the item for respondents of different ages

Relevant to caregivers ages 18 years and above; Not relevant to specific age groups (e.g., elderly)

Relevant to caregivers ages 18 years and above

4

How pertinent is the item to the associated content area

Critical/Core; Important; Relevant

Critical/Core; Important

5

How relevant is the item to all members of the target population (i.e., caregivers of adults with cancer)

Relevant to caregivers across the cancer spectrum; Specific to caregiving experiences along cancer spectrum

Relevant to caregivers across cancer spectrum

6

How independent is the item to other items

Moderately independent; Too closely related to one or more items

Moderately independent

7

How well does the item fit with other items in the construct

Fits well; Different content or meaning to other items in construct

Fits well

8

Does the item capture a single idea (or two closely related ideas)

Yes; No

Yes

9

How minimal are the information processing demands

One or two processing demands; More than one or two processing demands

One or two processing demands

10

Does the item stem correspond to the response scale

Yes; No

Yes