IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i14p8654-d864089.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Content Validity Assessment of the Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire in CKD Using Qualitative Methods

Author

Listed:
  • Eleanor Rivera

    (Department of Population Health Nursing Science, College of Nursing, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL 60612, USA)

  • Kristin Levoy

    (Department of Community and Health Systems, Indiana University School of Nursing, Bloomington, IN 47408, USA
    Indiana University Center for Aging Research, Regenstrief Institute, Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA)

  • Maya N. Clark-Cutaia

    (Rory Meyers College of Nursing, New York University, New York, NY 10010, USA)

  • Sarah Schrauben

    (Division of Renal, Electrolyte, and Hypertension, Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA)

  • Raymond R. Townsend

    (Division of Renal, Electrolyte, and Hypertension, Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA)

  • Mahboob Rahman

    (Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Medicine, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA)

  • James Lash

    (Division of Nephrology, College of Medicine, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL 60612, USA)

  • Milda Saunders

    (Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA)

  • Rebecca Frazier

    (Division of Nephorology and Hypertension, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL 60611, USA)

  • Hernan Rincon-Choles

    (Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA)

  • Karen B. Hirschman

    (Department of Biobehavioral Health Sciences, School of Nursing, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA)

Abstract

Background: The Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire (IPQ-R) measures individuals’ unique perceptions of their illness. While psychometric properties of the IPQ-R have been demonstrated in many disease populations, its content validity has not been extensively studied in non-dialysis chronic kidney disease (CKD). Unique features of CKD (e.g., few symptoms in early stages) may impact the measurement of illness perceptions. The purpose of this study was to explore the IPQ-R content validity in a sample of CKD patients. Methods: Thirty-one participants completed the IPQ-R and were interviewed regarding their subscale scores (timeline, consequences, personal control, treatment control, coherence, cyclical, and emotions). Participants’ agreement with their scores was tallied and assessed qualitatively for themes related to the content validity of the measure. Results: Individual participant agreement with their subscale scores averaged 79% (range: 29–100%). Subscale agreement varied: timeline (100%), consequences, coherence, and emotion (83% each), cyclical (75%), personal control (65%), and treatment control (64%). A qualitative exploration of disagreement responses revealed concerns with the relevance and comprehensibility of personal control and treatment control. Conclusions: Some IPQ-R subscales may pose content validity concerns in the non-dialysis CKD population. Item modification for comprehensibility (personal control) and relevance (treatment control) should be considered. Future studies should explore the impact of a patient’s symptom experience on IPQ-R validity, especially in populations like CKD with a higher proportion of asymptomatic patients.

Suggested Citation

  • Eleanor Rivera & Kristin Levoy & Maya N. Clark-Cutaia & Sarah Schrauben & Raymond R. Townsend & Mahboob Rahman & James Lash & Milda Saunders & Rebecca Frazier & Hernan Rincon-Choles & Karen B. Hirschm, 2022. "Content Validity Assessment of the Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire in CKD Using Qualitative Methods," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-9, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:14:p:8654-:d:864089
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/14/8654/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/14/8654/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:14:p:8654-:d:864089. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.