CONTENT VALIDITY FOR THE RESEARCH INSTRUMENT REGARDING TEACHING METHODS OF THE BASIC PRINCIPLES OF BIOETHICS

https://doi.org/10.22146/jpki.77062

Taufik Suryadi(1), Fadilah Alfiya(2), Muhammad Yusuf(3), Rosaria Indah(4), Taufik Hidayat(5), Kulsum Kulsum(6*)

(1) Universitas Syiah Kuala
(2) Universitas Syiah Kuala
(3) Universitas Syiah Kuala
(4) Universitas Syiah Kuala
(5) Universitas Andalas
(6) 
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


Background: Bioethics teaching especially related to the basic principles of bioethics can be done by several methods. Currently in the Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Syiah Kuala applying conventional lecture methods, so that other methods are needed to make teaching more interesting. To get the teaching method that students want, a research is carried out through filling out questionnaires. In order for the research questionnaire to be valid, it is necessary to validate the instrument through the content validity of the questionnaire.

Methods: The content validity of the questionnaire is carried out by determining the score of each statement item and calculating the Item Content Validity Index (I-CVI), Scale Content Validity Index-Average (S-CVI/Ave), Scale Content Validity Index-Universal agreement (S-CVI/UA), Content Validity Ratio (CVR), Content Validity Index (CVI) and Cohen Kappa Index (CKI) was conducted by 10 assessors from 10 different institutions.

Result: The results of the validation of the contents of the questionnaire from the 29 statement items tested obtained that 96% the CVR was ≥ 0.800, 96% I-CVI was ≥ 0.900, CVI was 0.903, S-CVI/UA was 0.551, S-CVI/Ave was 0.952 (recommendation 0.90), average proportion of items judges as relevances across the ten experts 0.949 and CKI was 95,17%.

Conclusions: The content validity of this research instrument is very high seen from the CVR, I-CVI, the average value of agreement between assessors (S-CVI/Ave), and the average value of the proportion of statement item relevance (S-CVI/UA) so that it can be developed in various similar studies that discuss the teaching methods of basic principles of bioethics.


Keywords


content validity, research instrument, basic principles of bioethics teaching

Full Text:

PDF


References

  1. Zulkarnain Z, Sofia S, Indah R, Renaldi T, Novirianthy R, Rahmi CR, et al. Buku Kurikulum S1 Pendidikan Dokter FK USK 2021-2024. Banda Aceh; 2021.
  2. Maulina B, Sari DR. Derajat stres mahasiswa baru fakultas kedokteran ditinjau dari tingkat penyesuaian diri terhadap tuntutan akademik. J Psikol Pendidik dan Konseling. 2018;4:1–5.
  3. Konsil Kedokteran Indonesia. Standar Nasional Pendidikan Profesi Dokter Indonesia. Kons Kedokt Indones. 2019;1–37.
  4. Muktamiroh H, Herqutanto, Soemantri D, Purwadianto A. The potential of situational judgement test as an instrument of ethical competence assessment: a literature review. J Pendidik Kedokt Indones. 2021;10:314–24.
  5. Istadi Y. Pengembangan area etika, moral, mediko-legal dan profesionalisme serta keselamatan pasien dalam kurikulum berbasis kompetensi. J Pendidik Kedokt Indones. 2013;2:9.
  6. Manurung WP, Sari MI, Aries R, Oktaria D. Hubungan pengetahuan kaidah dasar bioetika dan sikap penilaian moral pada mahasiswa pre-klinik dan klinik Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Lampung. Majority. 2019;8:25–9.
  7. Raditya AD, Hidayat T, Suchitra A. Perbedaan tingkat pengetahuan penerapan kaidah dasar bioetika dalam praktik kedokteran pada mahasiswa Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Andalas. J Ilmu Kesehat Indones. 2021;2:51–7.
  8. Waghmare J, Gade S. Designing ethics curriculum for medical graduates. J Educ Technol Heal Sci. 2016;3:95–100.
  9. Yuliana TW, Afandi D, Zulharman. Hubungan sistem pembelajaran dan frekuensi dokter muda menghadapi isu etik dengan tingkat refleksi kode etik kedokteran Indonesia di RSUD Arifin Achmad. 2012;2.
  10. Sjamsuhidajat R, Meilia PDI, Zulfiyah IA. Etika kedokteran dalam kegiatan tanggap darurat bencana. J Etika Kedokt Indones. 2020;4:1.
  11. Ramadhoni M. Hubungan indeks prestasi kumulatif dan lama studi dengan nilai uji kompetensi mahasiswa program profesi dokter peserta first taker Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Andalas. Skripsi. Universitas Andalas. 2018.
  12. Pusparini M, Imaningdyah A, Andayani SH, Pribadi Z, Miranti DD. Hubungan antara IPK program sarjana kedokteran dengan nilai UKMPPD mahasiswa FKUY. Juke Unila. 2016;1:235–42.
  13. Afandi D. Kaidah dasar bioetika dalam pengambilan keputusan klinis yang etis. Maj Kedokt Andalas. 2017;40:111.
  14. Mardhia. Metode pengajaran bioetika pada pendidikan kedokteran. J Cerebellum. 2015;1:76–85.
  15. Rohmawati A. Efektivitas pembelajaran. J Pendidik Usia Dini. 2015;9:15–32.
  16. Dama L, Husain IH, Nurelviana. Efektivitas pembelajaran daring peserta didik. J Pendidik. 2022;10:67–78.
  17. Yusoff MSB. ABC of content validation and content validity index calculation. Education in Medical Journal. 2019;11(2): 49-54.
  18. Cabatan MCC, Grajo LN, Sana EA. Development and content validation of the adaptation process in academia questionnaire for occupational therapy educators. Acta Medica Philipina. 2020; 54(2): 142-150.
  19. Rodrigues IB, Adachi JD, Beattie KA, MacDermid JC. Development and validation of a new tool to measure the facilitators, barriers and preferences to exercise in people with osteoporosis. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2017; 18(504):1-9.
  20. Zamanzadeh V, Ghahramanian A, Rassaoli M, Abbaszadeh A, Majd HA, Nikanfar AR. Design and implementation content validity study: Development of an instrument for measuring patient-centered communication. Journal of Caring Sciences. 2015;4(2):165-178.
  21. Amaya MA, Paixao DPSS, Sarquis LMM, Cruz EDA. Construction and content validation of checklist for patient safety in emergency care. Rev Gaucha Enferm. 2016; 37 (spe): 1-8.
  22. Masuwai A, Tajudin NM, Saad NS. Evaluating the face and content validity of teaching and learning guiding principles instrument (TLGPI): a perspective study of Malaysia teacher educators. Malay J Society and Space. 2016;12(3):11-21.
  23. Ayre C, Scally AJ. Critical value for Lawshe’s content validity ratio: Revisiting the original methods of calculation. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development. 2014; 47(1): 79-86.
  24. Bashooir K, Supahar S. The validity and reliability of the STEM-based science literacy performance assessment instrument. Journal of educational research and evaluation. 2018;22(2): 219-222.
  25. Hendryadi. Validitas Isi: tahap awal pengembangan kuesioner. J Ris Manaj dan Bisnis Fak Ekon UNIAT. 2017;2:169–78.
  26. Suryadi T, Kulsum K. Content validity for the research instrument regarding ethical issues in handling the COVID-19 pandemic. Period Tche Quim. 2020;17:100–118.
  27. Budiastuti D, Bandur A. Validitas dan reabilitas penelitian, dilengkapi analisis dengan NVIVO, SPSS dan AMOS. Jilid 1. Penerbit: Mitra Wacana Media. Jakarta. 2018: 146-148.
  28. Sugiyono. Statistik untuk penelitian. Cetakan ke-26. Penerbit Alfabeta. Bandung. 2015: 352-354



DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/jpki.77062

Article Metrics

Abstract views : 850 | views : 5050

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2023 Taufik Suryadi, Fadilah Alfiya, Muhammad Yusuf, Rosaria Indah, Taufik Hidayat, Kulsum Kulsum

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Jurnal Pendidikan Kedokteran Indonesia (The Indonesian Journal of Medical Education) indexed by:

  

 JPKI Stats