Validity of research in a medical environment is enhanced through incorporating the patient's perspective by using qualitative approaches. Our efforts to improve the validity of measures led us to examine the research process more broadly through mechanisms ofpatientparticipation: a protocol adviser, a participantadvisory panel, and focus groups. In our research program of biopsychosocial HIVstudies in the military population, feedback from patient participants provided the research staff with information important for refining standard measures, improving the research process, and interpreting the quantitative data analyses.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Psychological Association
. (1985). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: Author.
2.
Chen, H-T.
(1990). Theory-driven evaluations. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
3.
Cronbach, L. J.
(1971). Test validation. In R. L Thorndike (Ed.),Educational measurement (2nd ed., pp. 443-507). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
4.
Friedson, E.
(1961). Patients' view of medical practice. New York: Free Press.
5.
Krueger, R. A.
(1988). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
6.
Leventhal, H.
(1985). The role of theory in the study of adherence to treatments and doctorpatient interactions. Medical Care, 23, 556-563.
7.
Merton, R.
, Fiske, M., Kendall, P. (1956). The focused interview. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
8.
Messick, S.
(1989). Validity. In R. Levin (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 3-10). New York: Macmillan.
9.
Parsons, T.
(1951). The social system. New York: Free Press.
10.
Pedhazur, E. J.
, & Schmedlin, L. P. (1991). Measuremen4 design, and analysis: An integrated approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
11.
Sharf, B. F.
(1988). Teaching patients to speak up: Past and future trends. Patient Education Counseling, 11, 95-108.
