Explain the meanings of reliability and validity as used in the research process.

Explain the meanings of reliability and validity as used in the research process. Provide specific examples of how they are used at your workplace or in the fields of allied health care.

Example 1 Keyi
In research, reliability refers to the consistency of a measurement tool or procedure- that is, its ability to produce stable and consistent results across multiple applications. For example, a blood pressure monitor that provides similar readings under consistent conditions demonstrates high reliability. On the other hand, validity pertains to the accuracy of a measurement, whether the tool measures what it is intended to measure. For instance, a test designed to access patient satisfaction should accurately reflect the patients’ experiences and perceptions.
In a military pharmacy setting, consider a survey developed to evaluate service members’ adherence to medication regimens. If this survey yields consistent results when administered to the same individuals under similar conditions, it is deemed reliable. However, for the survey to be valid, it must accurately capture the factors influencing medication adherence, such as understanding of dosage instructions or perceived side effects.
In optometry, an eye chart used to assess visual acuity must provide consistent results across different administrations to be considered reliable. For validity, the chart should effectively measure the patient’s true visual acuity. If the chart is outdated or not standardized, it may not accurately assess current visual standards, thereby compromising its validity.
Ensuring both reliability and validity is crucial in health care research to guarantee that findings are both consistent and accurate, leading to effective patient care strategies. As noted by Middleton (2019), “Reliability i about the consistency of a measure, and validity is about the accuracy of a measure.”
Reference:
Middleton, F. (2019, July 3). Reliability vs. validity in research: Difference, types, and examples. Scribbr. https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/reliabilty-vs-validity/

Example 2 Idali
According to Neuman (2016, p.182), reliability refers to how we measure the physical world. For instance, if we use a home scale that gives us consistent results multiple times, it is a reliable scale. Also, thermometers, speedometers, and odometers would be reliable measures. In OBGYN, a reliable measure we use frequently, would be the paper tapes used to measure fundal height.
Validity is referred to as truthfulness (Neuman, 2016, p.182). In other words, essentially, it is the accuracy of a research finding. An example of using validity in my workplace would be using the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS). This scale has been effective in measuring postpartum depression in patients for many years and is considered the gold standard.
Both reliability and validity are important and desirable aspects in research, however, neither of these can be achieved perfectly. Additionally, reliability is necessary for research to be validated, but just because it is consistently reliable, it does not mean it is valid (Neuman, 2016, p.185).
References:
Neuman, W. L. (2016, pp.182-185). Understanding Research (2nd ed.). Pearson. https://bibliu.com/app/?bibliuMagicToken=WW51icjTJ5FsbXJK4GBluidxJGrqSKKv#/view/books/9780137668021/epub/OPS/xhtml/fileP70010178040000000000000000009DF.html#page_185

Example 3 Jonah
In the research process, reliability and validity are crucial concepts that determine the quality and trustworthiness of a study’s findings.
Validity refers to what an instrument measures and how accurately it performs, while reliability focuses on the consistency of the data collected and the extent to which a measuring tool minimizes random errors (Ahmed & Ishtiaq, 2021). With reliability, if a blood pressure cuff is used on the same patient multiple times under the same conditions, it should consistently produce similar readings. Validity, on the other hand, ensures that the cuff accurately measures the patient’s true blood pressure. Reliability in my workplace at Sharp Chula Vista ED is seen in triage scoring tools, such as the Emergency Severity Index (ESI). When different nurses assess the same patient using the ESI, they consistently assign the same severity level based on the patient’s symptoms and vital signs. This consistency ensures that patients are prioritized appropriately, regardless of who performs the triage, reducing variability and improving patient care. A large meta analysis of 19 studies from six countries showed that the the ESI “showed an acceptable level of overall reliability.” (Mirhaghi et al., 2015). Validity in my workplace at Sharp Chula Vista ED is reflected in the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), as it accurately assesses a patient’s level of consciousness. The GCS is designed to measure eye, verbal, and motor responses to determine the severity of neurological impairment (Jain & Iverson, 2023). If the scale correctly identifies patients with severe brain injuries who require immediate intervention and differentiates them from those with mild impairments, it demonstrates validity by ensuring appropriate clinical decisions and guiding treatment plans effectively.
Further application of reliability in allied health fields is seen in areas such as medical imaging. A CT scan must be valid in diagnosing internal bleeding and reliable in producing consistent results across different scans and technicians. Research must also consistent of being both reliable and valid. For example, studies on pain assessment scales in patients with dementia must ensure reliability (the scale produces consistent scores over time) and validity (it truly measures pain rather than anxiety or confusion).
References
Ahmed, I., & Ishtiaq, S. (2021). Reliability and validity: Importance in Medical Research. JPMA. The Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association, 71(10), 2401–2406. https://doi.org/10.47391/JPMA.06-861
Jain, S., & Iverson, L. M. (2023). Glasgow Coma Scale. In StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK513298/
Mirhaghi, A., Heydari, A., Mazlom, R., & Hasanzadeh, F. (2015). Reliability of the Emergency Severity Index: Meta-analysis. Sultan Qaboos University medical journal, 15(1), e71–e77.

Example 4 Paulina
The concepts of validity (accuracy) and reliability (consistency) are used to determine how well a method measures something. Reliability refers to the consistency of a measurement tool. A reliable instrument will produce the same result under the same conditions. Chapter 5.4 in the assigned textbook offers the following example: If your home scale gives the same weight each time you step on it (assuming no changes in your actual weight), it is considered reliable (Neuman, n.d.). Validity refers to how well a measurement tool captures what it is intended to measure. A valid measurement ensures that the results truly represent the concept being measured. For example, if your weight is a little different using a better scale at a doctor’s visit (that measures most accurately), those results would be more valid than the reliable scale at home that always gives the same results.
Ideally, data from a research study should be both valid and reliable. In a research study, validity refers to how well the produced data from study participants represents similar individuals in the general population (Patino & Ferreira, 2018). A study is considered reliable if it produces the same results when repeated under the same conditions.
References
Neuman, W. L. (n.d.). Understanding Research (2nd ed.). https://bibliu.com/app/?bibliuMagicToken=9WN8TS9lXOvVG3t1ZvUPd1QkS5XqJSrQ#/view/books/9780137668021/epub/OPS/xhtml/fileP7001017804000000000000000000003.html#page_2
Patino, C., & Ferreira, J. (2018). Internal and external validity: Can you apply research study results to your patients? Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia, 44(3). https://doi.org/10.1590/s1806-37562018000000164

 

Last Completed Projects