reliability validity and trustworthiness in quantitative research

The World Health Professions Alliance described the benefits of IPC as improved access to health interventions and improved coordination between different sectors for individuals and their families with more involvement in decision-making, providing comprehensive, coordinated care, the efficient use of resources, the reduced incidence and prevalence of disability, and increased job satisfaction of health professionals. The World Health Organization defines IPC as “collaborative practice that happens when multiple health workers from different professional backgrounds work together with patients, families, carers and communities to deliver the highest quality of care across settings”. Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) has been documented as a vital component in research, education, and health care practice. This information provides evidence to support tailored intervention to promote the IPC competency of primary care team work to achieve a common goal.

The developed IPC competency instrument was confirmed its validity and reliability that contributes to assessing the IPC competency of primary care teams in DHSs. All subscales showed acceptable Cronbach’s alpha values with a range of 0.86–0.94. In the CFA results, the model fit indices were acceptable (CFI = 0.99, RMSEA = 0.049, SRMR = 0.043) or slightly less than the goodness-of-fit values (GFI = 0.84). EFA suggested six factors: 1) collaborative teamwork, 2) population- and community-centred care, 3) communication and mutual respect, 4) clarification of roles and responsibilities, 5) interprofessional reflection, and 6) interprofessional values and mixed skills. Results: The findings showed an I-CVI range of 0.86–1.00 and S-CVI/UA = 0.87 for 49 items with a 5-point Likert scale. In the quantitative phase, content validity, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and reliability were conducted, and the final version of the questionnaire was evaluated with 497 participants. Data were analysed using thematic analysis, and trustworthiness was verified by triangulation and peer debriefing. In the qualitative phase, 37 participants, including policymakers, practitioners, and academics with experience in primary care, were involved. This study was designed as an exploratory mixed methods study. The aim of this study is to develop a valid and reliable instrument to assess the IPC competency of primary care team members in DHSs. However, there are limited instruments to assess IPC in providing primary care in the district health system (DHS) in Thailand. Evidence shows that interprofessional collaboration (IPC) practice contributes to the quality of health care.

Reliability validity and trustworthiness in quantitative research