Content validity and the language of breathing

ObjectiveThe study objective was to validate the content validity of natural language words and phrases selected from participant logs as breathing-intensity descriptors.Design and settingA descriptive design was implemented using data collected in a prior study in which the breathing-intensity descriptors had been identified.MethodsContent validity was used to rate natural language breathing-intensity descriptors. Six seasoned nurses with a minimum of master’s preparation served as the expert panel. On the basis of a 4-point (0–3) scale, mean scores were calculated for natural language breathing-intensity descriptors. Content validity was established for mean scores greater than 1.0.ResultsA total of 66 (89%) natural language breathing-intensity descriptors were validated. The experts did not validate eight descriptors that described the lower end of breathing intensity.ConclusionsNatural language breathing-intensity descriptors were validated. The highest validation scores were achieved with breathing-intensity descriptors at the upper end of the breathing-intensity spectrum. However, words and phrases that aligned with the lower end of the spectrum generated lower content validity scores. This was an unexpected finding on the full spectrum of breathing intensity that raised questions about differences in language, meaning, and significance between participants and experts.