Procedures for validating an instrument
Furthermore, initiatives such as Health On the Net Foundation are not aimed specifically at evaluating information about health research.This may be partly due to the paucity of available measurement tools, which has potentially stalled needed assessment and surveillance.For example, Haneef and colleagues (2015) identified at least one example of spin or misrepresentation of study findings in 88% of American, British, and Canadian media reports on studies of medical interventions.Given the impact health-related media reports can have, ensuring that they are of high quality is of critical importance.The reliability and validity of the QIMR were subsequently tested with a sample of media reports.The development and testing process of the QIMR is presented in Fig. This study was exempt from ethics review by the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board.To address this issue, we developed the Quality Index for health-related Media Reports (QIMR; Additional file 1).The objective of this paper is to describe the development and preliminary validation of the QIMR for evaluating the quality of health research reports published in the Canadian media. First, the QIMR was developed through literature searches and consultation with key experts.
However, concerns about the reliability of health research reports have been raised.Items from the ‘validity’ domain were negatively skewed, suggesting possible floor effect.These items were not eliminated due to acceptable content and face validity.Key informants expressed that precision and confidence intervals were topics beyond the scope of what could be reasonably expected of a lay audience with no background in health research to appreciate.It was suggested that it may be sufficient for health journalists to acknowledge the possibility of false positive findings in qualitative terms as opposed to quantifying the likelihood.