Table 3. Content validity by ten experts (n = 10).

Item	Relevance of the questions
	Number of ratings of 3 or 4	I-CVIa	Pcb	K*c	Evaluationd
1	9	0.90	0.010	0.90	****
2	9	0.90	0.010	0.90	****
3	7	0.70	0.117	0.66	***
4	10	1.00	0.001	1.00	****
5	7	0.70	0.117	0.66	***
6	7	0.70	0.117	0.66	***
7	8	0.80	0.044	0.79	****
8	10	1.00	0.001	1.00	****
9	8	0.80	0.044	0.79	****
10	10	1.00	0.001	1.00	****
11	7	0.70	0.117	0.66	***
12	10	1.00	0.001	1.00	****
13	9	0.90	0.010	0.90	****
14	9	0.90	0.010	0.90	****
15	9	0.90	0.010	0.90	****
16	7	0.70	0.117	0.66	***
17	9	0.90	0.010	0.90	****
18	9	0.90	0.010	0.90	****
19	8	0.80	0.044	0.79	****
20	9	0.90	0.010	0.90	****
21	9	0.90	0.010	0.90	****
22	9	0.90	0.010	0.90	****
23	8	0.80	0.044	0.79	****
24	7	0.70	0.117	0.66	***
25	8	0.80	0.044	0.79	****
26	9	0.90	0.010	0.90	****
27	5	0.50	0.246	0.34	**
28	8	0.80	0.044	0.79	****
29	8	0.80	0.044	0.79	****
30	9	0.90	0.010	0.90	****
31	7	0.70	0.117	0.66	***
32	8	0.80	0.044	0.79	****
33	9	0.90	0.010	0.90	****
S-CVI/Avee 0.83
S-CVI/UAf 0.12

^aI-CVI (Item-level content validity index) = number of experts providing a rating of 3 or 4/number of experts

^bP_c (Probability of chance occurrence) = [N!A!(N-A)!] * 0.5^N, N = number of experts; A = number of experts agreeing on a rating of 3 or 4

^cK* (Modified kappa) = (I-CVI- P_c)(1- P_c)

^dEvaluation criteria for the level of content validity; relationship between I-CVI and K*; excellent validity = I-CVI≥0.78 and K*>0.74(****); good validity I-CVI < 0.78 and ≥0.60 and K*≤0.74 (***); fair validity I-CVI < 0.6 and ≥0.40 and K*≤0.59(**); and poor validity I-CVI < 0.4 and K*<0.40(*)

^eS-CVI/Ave = Scale-level content validity index/average

^fS-CVI/UA = Scale-level content validity index/universal agreement.