Applying behaviour change models to policy-making: development and validation of the Policymakers' Information Use Questionnaire (POLIQ).
Behaviour change
Evidence-based
Policy-makers
Questionnaire
Tool
Validation
Journal
Health research policy and systems
ISSN: 1478-4505
Titre abrégé: Health Res Policy Syst
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101170481
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
23 Jan 2023
23 Jan 2023
Historique:
received:
03
09
2021
accepted:
18
11
2022
entrez:
23
1
2023
pubmed:
24
1
2023
medline:
26
1
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The purpose of this study was to develop and validate the Policymakers' Information Use Questionnaire (POLIQ) to capture the intention of individuals in decision-making positions, such as health policy-makers, to act on research-based evidence in order to inform theory and the application of behaviour change models to decision-making spheres. The development and validation comprised three steps: item generation, qualitative face validation with cognitive debriefing and factorial construct validation. Confirmatory factor analysis was applied to estimate item-domain correlations for five predefined constructs relating to content, beliefs, behaviour, control and intent. Cronbach's alpha coefficient was calculated to assess the overall consistency of questionnaire items with the predefined constructs. Participants in the item generation and face validation were health and policy researchers and two former decision-makers (former assistant deputy ministers) from the Canadian provincial level. Participants in the construct validation were 39 Canadian decision-makers at various positions of municipal, provincial and federal jurisdiction who participated in a series of policy dialogues focused on childhood disability. Cognitive debriefing allowed for small adjustments in language for clarity, including simultaneous validation of the English and French questionnaires. Participants found that the questions were clear and addressed the domains being targeted. Internal consistency of items belonging to the respective questionnaire domains was moderate to high, with estimated Cronbach's alpha values ranging from 0.67 to 0.84. Estimated item-domain correlations indicated moderate to high measurement performance for the domains norm, control and beliefs, whereas weak to moderate correlations resulted for the constructs content and intent. Estimated imprecision of factor loadings (95% confidence interval widths) was considerable for the questionnaire domains content and intent. Measuring decision-makers' behaviour in relation to research evidence use is challenging. We provide initial evidence on face validity and appropriate measurement properties of the POLIQ based on a convenience sample of decision-makers in social and health policy. Larger validation studies and further psychometric property testing will support further utility of the POLIQ.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The purpose of this study was to develop and validate the Policymakers' Information Use Questionnaire (POLIQ) to capture the intention of individuals in decision-making positions, such as health policy-makers, to act on research-based evidence in order to inform theory and the application of behaviour change models to decision-making spheres.
METHODS
METHODS
The development and validation comprised three steps: item generation, qualitative face validation with cognitive debriefing and factorial construct validation. Confirmatory factor analysis was applied to estimate item-domain correlations for five predefined constructs relating to content, beliefs, behaviour, control and intent. Cronbach's alpha coefficient was calculated to assess the overall consistency of questionnaire items with the predefined constructs. Participants in the item generation and face validation were health and policy researchers and two former decision-makers (former assistant deputy ministers) from the Canadian provincial level. Participants in the construct validation were 39 Canadian decision-makers at various positions of municipal, provincial and federal jurisdiction who participated in a series of policy dialogues focused on childhood disability.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Cognitive debriefing allowed for small adjustments in language for clarity, including simultaneous validation of the English and French questionnaires. Participants found that the questions were clear and addressed the domains being targeted. Internal consistency of items belonging to the respective questionnaire domains was moderate to high, with estimated Cronbach's alpha values ranging from 0.67 to 0.84. Estimated item-domain correlations indicated moderate to high measurement performance for the domains norm, control and beliefs, whereas weak to moderate correlations resulted for the constructs content and intent. Estimated imprecision of factor loadings (95% confidence interval widths) was considerable for the questionnaire domains content and intent.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Measuring decision-makers' behaviour in relation to research evidence use is challenging. We provide initial evidence on face validity and appropriate measurement properties of the POLIQ based on a convenience sample of decision-makers in social and health policy. Larger validation studies and further psychometric property testing will support further utility of the POLIQ.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36691025
doi: 10.1186/s12961-022-00942-y
pii: 10.1186/s12961-022-00942-y
pmc: PMC9872298
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
8Informations de copyright
© 2022. Crown.
Références
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2017 Oct 04;14(10):
pubmed: 28976924
PLoS One. 2011;6(7):e21704
pubmed: 21818262
Health Res Policy Syst. 2021 Jul 26;19(1):105
pubmed: 34311740
Health Res Policy Syst. 2019 Apr 15;17(1):41
pubmed: 30987644
Implement Sci. 2011 Apr 27;6:43
pubmed: 21524292
Health Res Policy Syst. 2017 Apr 26;15(1):35
pubmed: 28446185
Res Nurs Health. 1999 Jun;22(3):203-16
pubmed: 10344701
Health Res Policy Syst. 2011 Jun 24;9:29
pubmed: 21702956
Health Res Policy Syst. 2015 Oct 24;13:46
pubmed: 26499950
J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2006 Winter;26(1):13-24
pubmed: 16557505
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Feb 16;103(4):306-16
pubmed: 21212381
Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2008 Apr;34(4):228-43
pubmed: 18468362
Psychol Bull. 2006 Mar;132(2):249-68
pubmed: 16536643
Glob Public Health. 2012;7(7):750-65
pubmed: 22394290
Milbank Q. 2002;80(1):125-54
pubmed: 11933791
Health Res Policy Syst. 2014 Jul 14;12:34
pubmed: 25023520
Milbank Q. 2010 Dec;88(4):444-83
pubmed: 21166865
SAGE Open Nurs. 2019 Jul 26;5:2377960819861854
pubmed: 33415246