Development and Evaluation of the Content and Face Validity of an Mpox Questionnaire for Primary Healthcare Workers
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Primary healthcare workers are essential in managing infectious diseases, including mpox. A validated instrument is required to assess their knowledge and readiness for mpox management. This study evaluated the content and face validity of a Malay-language mpox questionnaire for primary healthcare workers in Malaysia.
Methods: Questionnaire development was conducted in two stages: i) item generation and ii) judgement and quantification. Ten experts from relevant disciplines assessed content validity, while 10 primary healthcare workers participated in face validation. The content validity index (CVI), face validity index (FVI), and modified Kappa were calculated to evaluate clarity, relevance, necessity, and representativeness.
Results: The initial questionnaire comprised 62 items across two domains (knowledge and readiness). During content validation, one item assessing clarity yielded an item-level CVI (I-CVI) of 0.70 and a modified Kappa of 0.67; other items achieved excellent thresholds (I-CVI ≥ 0.78; modified Kappa ≥ 0.74). Scale-level CVI (S-CVI/Ave) across all criteria was >0.90, indicating excellent overall validity. The universal agreement S-CVI (S-CVI/UA) for relevance was 0.76, slightly below the recommended cut-off. Based on these findings and expert recommendations, one item was removed due to subthreshold performance and redundancy. Face validation demonstrated strong comprehensibility, with item-level FVI (I-FVI), scale-level FVI (S-FVI/Ave), and universal agreement S-FVI (S-FVI/UA) values exceeding recommended thresholds (0.78, 0.90, and 0.83, respectively). The final questionnaire contained 61 items.
Conclusion: This study provides a validated Malay-language questionnaire for assessing knowledge and readiness for mpox management among primary healthcare workers. This tool provides a standardised approach for identifying knowledge gaps and guiding targeted training to strengthen outbreak preparedness.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Titanji BK, Tegomoh B, Nematollahi S, Konomos M, Kulkarni PA. Monkeypox: a contemporary review for healthcare professionals. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2022;9(7):ofac310. https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofac310
Bunge EM, Hoet B, Chen L, Lienert F, Weidenthaler H, Baer LR, et al. The changing epidemiology of human monkeypox—a potential threat? A systematic review. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2022;16(2):e0010141. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0010141
Harapan H, Ophinni Y, Megawati D, Frediansyah A, Mamada SS, Salampe M, et al. Monkeypox: a comprehensive review. Viruses. 2022;14(10):2155. https://doi.org/10.3390/v14102155
McCollum AM, Shelus V, Hill A, Traore T, Onoja B, Nakazawa, Y, et al. Epidemiology of human mpox—worldwide, 2018–2021. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2023;72(3):68–72. https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm7203a4
Amer FA, Nofal HA, Gebriel MG, Bedawy AM, Allam AA, Khalil HES, et al. Grasping knowledge, attitude, and perception towards monkeypox among healthcare workers and medical students: an Egyptian cross-sectional study. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2024;14:1339352. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2024.1339352
Jain S. Monkeypox: need for vigilant health system and regulations towards a global health threat. Indian J. Community Health. 2024;36(4):500–502. https://doi.org/10.47203/IJCH.2024.v36i04.001
BERNAMA. Malaysia records second mpox case [Internet]. Kuala Lumpur: BERNAMA; 2024. Available at: https://bernama.com/en/news.php?id=2368366
BERNAMA. MOH confirms new mpox cluster involving four family members [Internet]. Kuala Lumpur: BERNAMA; 2025. Available at: https://www.bernama.com/en/news.php?id=2491432
AbdulMumin AK, Adeniyi MA, Temitayo-Oboh AO, Abdullah A, Ojo OY. Knowledge, perception and safety practices of monkeypox infection among healthcare workers in a tertiary health facility in southwest Nigeria. Int J Community Med Public Health. 2023;10(9):3059–3069. https://doi.org/10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20232661
Lin GSS, Tan WW, Chan DZK, Ooi KS, Hashim H. Monkeypox awareness, knowledge, and attitude among undergraduate preclinical and clinical students at a Malaysian dental school. Asian Pac J Trop Med. 2022;15(10):461–467. https://doi.org/10.4103/1995-7645.359787
Jahromi AS, Jokar M, Sharifi N, Kashkooli S, Rahmanian K, Rahmanian V. Global knowledge and attitudes towards mpox (monkeypox) among healthcare workers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Health. 2024;16(5):487–498. https://doi.org/10.1093/inthealth/ihad094
Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior: frequently asked questions. Hum Behav Emerg Technol. 2020;2(4):314–324. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbe2.195
Ogbodoakum N, Zainal Abiddin N. Theory of planned behaviour and readiness for changes: implication for organisations. Mimbar Pendidikan. 2017;2(1):1–18. https://doi.org/10.17509/mimbardik.v2i1.6019
Desalegn Z, Deyessa N, Teka B, Shiferaw W, Yohannes M, Hailemariam D, et al. Evaluation of COVID-19 related knowledge and preparedness in health professionals at selected health facilities in a resource-limited setting in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. PLoS ONE. 2021;16(2):e0244050. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0244050
Sadek BN, Hendy A, Alhowaymel FM, Abaoud AF, Alenezi A, Hendy A, et al. Are pediatric nurses prepared to respond to monkeypox outbreak? PLoS ONE. 2024;19(4):e0300225. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0300225
Artino AR, La Rochelle JS, Dezee KJ, Gehlbach H. Developing questionnaires for educational research: AMEE Guide No. 87. Med Teach. 2014;36(6):463–474. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2014.889814
Sullivan GM. A primer on the validity of assessment instruments. J Grad Med Educ. 2011;3(2):119–120. https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-11-00075.1
Zarei F, Dehghani A, Ratansiri A, Ghaffari M, Raina SK, Halimi A, et al. ChecKAP: a checklist for reporting a knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) study. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2024;25(7):2573–2577. https://doi.org/10.31557/APJCP.2024.25.7.2573
Gjersing L, Caplehorn JRM, Clausen T. Cross-cultural adaptation of research instruments: language, setting, time and statistical considerations. BMC Med Res Methodol 2010;10:13. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-10-13
Alshahrani NZ, Algethami MR, Alarifi AM, Alzahrani F, Alshehri EA, Alshehri AM, et al. Knowledge and attitude regarding monkeypox virus among physicians in Saudi Arabia: a cross-sectional study. Vaccines. 2022;10(12):2099. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10122099
Sallam M, Al-Mahzoum K, Al-Tammemi AB, Alkurtas M, Mirzaei F, Kareem N, et al. Assessing healthcare workers’ knowledge and their confidence in the diagnosis and management of human monkeypox: a cross-sectional study in a Middle Eastern country. Healthcare. 2022;10(9):1722. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10091722
Raman H, Jamil A, Rasheed A, Abdulrahman Jairoun A, Lua PL, Ibrahim UI, et al. Knowledge of medical students towards the re-emergence of human monkeypox virus. Cureus. 2023;15(10):e46761. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.46761
Aynalem ZB, Abate MD, Meseret F, Muhamed AN, Abebe GK, Adal AB, et al. Knowledge, attitude and associated factors of monkeypox infection among healthcare workers in Injibara General Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2024;17:1159–1173. https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S454828
Andrade C, Menon V, Ameen S, Kumar Praharaj S. Designing and conducting knowledge, attitude, and practice surveys in psychiatry: practical guidance. Indian J Psychol Med. 2020;42(5):478–481. https://doi.org/10.1177/0253717620946111
Mohd Hairon S, Rosedi A, Mohd Yusoff SS, Abdul Hamid A, Mohammad Basir MF, Mohd Yusoff D. Psychometric validation of a Malay-translated questionnaire on knowledge, attitudes, and practices of chronic kidney disease prevention among type 2 diabetes mellitus patients. Malays J Med Health Sci. 2024;20(6):278–286. https://doi.org/10.47836/mjmhs.20.6.36
Yusoff MSB, Arifin WN, Hadie SNH. ABC of questionnaire development and validation for survey research. Educ Med J. 2021;13(1):97–108. https://doi.org/10.21315/eimj2021.13.1.10
Yusoff MSB. ABC of content validation and content validity index calculation. Educ Med J. 2019;11(2):49–54. https://doi.org/10.21315/eimj2019.11.2.6
Sengupta M, Dutta S, Roy A, Chakrabarti S, Mukhopadhyay I. Knowledge, attitude and practice survey towards COVID-19 vaccination: a mediation analysis. Int J Health Plann Mgmt. 2022;37(4):2063–2080. https://doi.org/10.1002/hpm.3449
McCoach DB, Gable RK, Madura JP. Instrument development in the affective domain. New York: Springer; 2013. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7135-6
Polit DF, Beck CT, Owen SV. Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Res Nurs Health. 2007;30(4):459–467. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20199
Yusoff MSB. ABC of response process validation and face validity index calculation. Educ Med J. 2019;11(3):55–61. https://doi.org/10.21315/eimj2019.11.3.6
Zamanzadeh V, Ghahramanian A, Rassouli M, Abbaszadeh A, Alavi-Majd H, Nikanfar AR. Design and implementation content validity study: development of an instrument for measuring patient-centered communication. J Caring Sci. 2015;4(2):165–178. https://doi.org/10.15171/jcs.2015.017
Taherdoost H. Validity and reliability of the research instrument; how to test the validation of a questionnaire/survey in a research. Int J Acad Res Manag. 2016;5(3):28–36.
Mohamad Marzuki MF, Yaacob NA, Yaacob NM. Translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and validation of the Malay version of the system usability scale questionnaire for the assessment of mobile apps. JMIR Hum Factors. 2018;5(2):e10308. https://doi.org/10.2196/10308