Validez de contenido por juicio de expertos del NIOSH Worker Well-Being Questionnaire en Español para medir el Bienestar en combatientes de incendios forestales en México: Content validity by expert judgment of the NIOSH Worker Well-Being Questionnaire in Spanish for measuring Well-being in wildfire fighters in Mexico      |       墨西哥森林火灾扑救队员中 NIOSH 工作者福祉问卷的西班牙语内容效度

Esmeralda Alcaraz Sánchez; Raúl Flores Carrillo; Silvia Graciela León Cortés

doi:10.25176/RFMH.v24i4.6056

Authors

Esmeralda Alcaraz Sánchez Universidad de Guadalajara
Raúl Flores Carrillo Doctorado en Ciencias de la Salud Ocupacional, Departamento de Salud Pública, Centro Universitario de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad de Guadalajara.
Silvia Graciela León Cortés Doctorado en Ciencias de la Salud Ocupacional, Departamento de Salud Pública, Centro Universitario de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad de Guadalajara.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.25176/RFMH.v24i4.6056

Keywords:

Surveys and Questionnaires, Validation Study, Wildfires, Firefighters, Working Conditions

Abstract

Introduction: Firefighting in forests is a dangerous and demanding task, highlighting the need to understand the well-being of these workers through tools such as the NIOSH Worker Well-Being Questionnaire in Spanish. However, this questionnaire has not been adapted and validated for the Mexican context.

Objective: The study aimed to validate the NIOSH Worker Well-Being Questionnaire in Spanish for forest firefighters in Mexico.

Methods: A psychometric design was used, including content validation through expert judgment in validation, health, and work activities related to firefighting. The questionnaire incorporates five domains with a Likert scale, and the Aiken's V coefficient was used for validation.

Results: Most items in the questionnaire showed an Aiken's V coefficient above 0.70, with 95% confidence intervals, indicating high content validity. There was concordance with the original validation of the instrument, enabling its application in the Mexican work context.

Conclusion: The expert validation confirmed the relevance, coherence, and clarity of the NIOSH Worker Well-Being Questionnaire in Spanish for forest firefighters in Mexico. This analysis is a critical component of a broader project, laying the groundwork for subsequent stages including a pilot test and factorial analysis, as well as contributing to improving the safety and quality of life of these workers.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

U.S. Fire Administration. Firefighter Fatalities in the United States (2022). Disponible en: https://apps.usfa.fema.gov/firefighter-fatalities/

CONAFOR, Comisión Nacional Forestal (2018), Nos llaman combatientes. Disponible en: https://www.gob.mx/conafor/articulos/nos-llaman-combatientes

Moody, V.J., Purchio, T.J., & Palmer, C. (2019). Descriptive analysis of injuries and illnesses self-reported by wildland firefighters. International Journal of Wildland Fire. doi:10.1071/WF18132

Butler, C.R., Marsh, S.M., Domitrovich, J.W., & Helmkamp, J.C. (2017). Wildland firefighter deaths in the United States: A comparison of existing surveillance systems. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, 14, 258 - 270. doi:10.1080/15459624.2016.1250004

Chari, R., Chang, C. C., Sauter, S. L., Petrun Sayers, E. L., Huang, W., & Fisher, G. G. (2021). NIOSH worker well-being questionnaire (WellBQ). U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. doi:10.26616/NIOSHPUB2021110revised52021

Chari, R., Sauter, S. L., Petrun Sayers, E. L., Huang, W., Fisher, G. G., & Chang, C. C. (2022). Development of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Worker Well-Being Questionnaire. Journal of occupational and environmental medicine, 64(8), 707–717. doi:10.1097/JOM.0000000000002585

Fontana, L. D., Pasquale; Santocono, Carolina; Annarumma, Maddalena; Iavicoli, Ivo. (2023). Validation of the NIOSH Worker Well-Being Questionnaire in Italian Language. Journal of occupational and environmental medicine, 65(6), e402-e412. doi:10.1097/jom.0000000000002835

Schulte, P. A., Guerin, R. J., Schill, A. L., Bhattacharya, A., Cunningham, T. R., Pandalai, S. P., Eggerth, D., & Stephenson, C. M. (2015). Considerations for Incorporating "Well-Being" in Public Policy for Workers and Workplaces. American journal of public health, 105(8), e31–e44. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2015.302616

Dunn, J. G. H., Bouffard, M., & Rogers, W. T. (1999). Assessing content-relevance in sport psychology scale-construction research: Issues and recommendations.Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 3,15–36. doi:10.1207/s15327841mpee0301_2

Aiken, L. R. (1980). Content Validity and Reliability of Single Items or Questionnaires. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 40(4), 955-959. doi:10.1177/001316448004000419

Aiken, L. R. (1985). Three Coefficients for Analyzing the Reliability and Validity of Ratings. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 45(1), 131-142. doi:10.1177/0013164485451012

Penfield Randall D; Giacobbi, Peter R.. (2004) Applying a Score Confidence Interval to Aiken's Item Content-Relevance Index, Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 8:4, 213-225, doi:10.1207/s15327841mpee0804_3

Hamar, B., Coberley, C., Pope, J. E., & Rula, E. Y. (2015). Well-being improvement in a midsize employer: changes in well-being, productivity, health risk, and perceived employer support after implementation of a well-being improvement strategy. Journal of occupational and environmental medicine, 57(4), 367–373. doi:10.1097/JOM.0000000000000433

Vendrig, A. A., & Schaafsma, F. G. (2018). Reliability and Validity of the Work and Well-Being Inventory (WBI) for Employees. Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 28(2), 377–390. doi:10.1007/s10926-017-9729-7

Hagan-Haynes, K. M., Virginia; Puma, Jini; Farewell, Charlotte. (2024). Caring for the Caregiver: Work Mistreatment and Well-Being Among Early Childhood Education Staff in Colorado. Early Childhood Education Journal. doi:10.1007/s10643-024-01644-6

Ventura-León, J. (2020). Escalas, inventarios y cuestionarios: ¿son lo mismo? Educación Médica, 21(3), 218-220. doi:10.1016/j.edumed.2019.04.001

Simms, L. J., Zelazny, K., Williams, T. F., & Bernstein, L. (2019). Does the number of response options matter? Psychometric perspectives using personality questionnaire data. Psychological assessment, 31(4), 557–566. doi:10.1037/pas0000648

Torres-Malca, J. R., Vera-Ponce, V. J., Zuzunaga-Montoya, F. E., Talavera, J. E., & De La Cruz-Vargas, J. A. (2022). Validez de contenido por juicio de expertos de un instrumento para medir conocimientos, actitudes y prácticas sobre el consumo de sal en la población peruana. Revista de la Facultad de Medicina Humana, 22(2), 273-279. doi:10.25176/rfmh.v22i2.4768

Merino-Soto, C. (2018). Confidence interval for difference between coefficients of content validity (Aiken’s V): A SPSS syntax. [Intervalos de confianza para la diferencia entre coeficientes de validez de contenido (V Aiken): Una sintaxis SPSS] Anales De Psicología, 34(3), 587-590. doi:10.6018/analesps.34.3.283481

Dieguez-Reyes E, Valdés-Santiago D. Validez de contenido de la escala RED-Tecnoestrés en el sector informático cubano. La Habana, 2023. Revista Cubana de Salud y Trabajo [Internet]. 2023 [citado 17 Nov 2023]; 25 (1) Disponible en: https://revsaludtrabajo.sld.cu/index.php/revsyt/article/view/403

Koopmans, E., Cornish, K., Fyfe, T. M., Bailey, K., & Pelletier, C. A. (2022). Health risks and mitigation strategies from occupational exposure to wildland fire: a scoping review. Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England), 17(1), 2. doi:10.1186/s12995-021-00328-w