Skip to main content
. 2023 Nov 2;24:94. doi: 10.1186/s12910-023-00968-z

Table 2.

Fictitious rating on an 18-item scale by eight experts (Part II, Section 1)

Item Expert 1 Expert 2 Expert 3 Expert 4 Expert 5 Expert 6 Expert 7 Expert 8 Number in Agreement Item CVI
1 x x x x x x x x 8 1.00
2 x x x x x x _ x 7 0.88
3 x x x x x x x x 8 1.00
4 x x x x x x x x 8 1.00
5 x x x x x x x x 8 1.00
6 x x x x x x x x 8 1.00
7 x x x x x x x x 8 1.00
8 x x x x x x x x 8 1.00
9 x x x x x x x x 8 1.00
10 x x x x x x x x 8 1.00
11 x x x x x x x x 8 1.00
12 x x x x x x x x 8 1.00
13 x x x x x x x x 8 1.00
14 x x x x x x x x 8 1.00
15 x x x x x x x x 8 1.00
16 x x x x x x x x 8 1.00
17 x x x x x x x x 8 1.00
18 x x x _ x x x x 7 0.88
Mean I-CVI =  0.99
Proportion Relevant: S-CVI/UA =  0.89
1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 Mean expert proportion =  0.98

I-CVI item-level content validity index, S-CVI/UA scale-level content validity index, universal agreement calculation method