Key result
New hypertension mHealth focus group guide achieves high content validity with ~0.97 expert agreement.
Why the study?
There is a need to understand patients' self-management needs, preferences, and barriers to develop contextually relevant mHealth interventions for hypertension.
A systematically developed focus group discussion guide demonstrated high content validity for exploring patient perspectives to inform patient-centered mHealth interventions for hypertension.
Captured external expert commentary on this paper, strongest first. Original sources are linked where available.
“The manuscript is well-written and the study is timely. The use of a mixed-methods approach to develop and validate the needs assessment guide is a major strength of the study. The guide has the potential to be a valuable tool for researchers and clinicians who are developing and implementing mHealth interventions for patients with hypertension.”
“The authors have addressed an important gap in the literature by developing and validating a needs assessment guide for mHealth-based self-management among patients with hypertension. The guide is comprehensive and covers a wide range of topics that are relevant to patients with hypertension. The study is well-conducted and the findings are clearly presented.”
“The authors have done a good job in developing and validating a needs assessment guide for mHealth-based self-management among patients with hypertension. The study is well-designed and the methods are appropriate. The results are clearly presented and the conclusions are supported by the data.”
Supports mHealth hypertension tool development with validated guide; leaves open effects on self-management and outcomes.
Background Given the significant global burden of hypertension and the need to understand patients’ self-management needs, preferences, and barriers when developing mobile health (mHealth) interventions, this study aimed to develop and validate a Focus Group Discussion (FGD) guide to these aspects for designing a contextually relevant mHealth application. Methods The FGD guide was developed through a six-step systematic process, including literature review and domain identification, development of the initial FGD guide, face-validity assessment, expert content validation, translation and cultural/linguistic adaptation, and pilot testing with final refinement. Face validity was assessed by five experts to evaluate the flow, clarity, and comprehensibility of the guide. Content validity was assessed by a separate panel of ten experts using a structured three-point rating scale, with findings analyzed using the Content Validity Index (CVI), Content Validity Ratio (CVR), and modified Kappa. The guide was pilot-tested with five individuals with hypertension to further assess its clarity, sequencing, and feasibility and to inform final refinement. Results Expert evaluations demonstrated high item-level content validity, with I-CVI values ranging from 0.90 to 1.00. The S-CVI/Ave was 0.97, while the S-CVI/UA was 0.68. CVR values ranged from 0.80 to 1.00, with all 19 questions meeting the prespecified criterion for retention. Modified Kappa values ranged from 0.899 to 1.00, indicating high chance-adjusted expert agreement. Feedback from healthcare professionals and individuals with hypertension supported refinement of the guide’s wording, clarity, and contextual relevance. Conclusion This systematically developed FGD guide demonstrated high item-level and average content validity, with high chance-adjusted expert agreement among the participating experts. The guide provides a content-validated qualitative data-collection guide for exploring patient perspectives on hypertension self-management and informing the development of patient-centered mHealth interventions. Further evaluation in larger and more diverse populations and settings is needed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Salins et al. (2026) studied Hypertension (n=20). Focus Group Discussion (FGD) guide was evaluated on Content validity (Item-level Content Validity Index, Scale-level Content Validity Index). The 19-question Focus Group Discussion guide for exploring mHealth hypertension self-management needs demonstrated high content validity, achieving an average scale-level content validity index of 0.97 among experts.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: