Validity and Reliability of Persian Version of Evaluation and Feedback for Effective Clinical Education Questionnaire in Occupational Therapy Education in Iran

Document Type : Original Article


1 Rehabilitation Research Center, Department of Occupational Therapy, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

2 MSc Student, Rehabilitation Research Center, Department of Occupational Therapy, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

3 Radboudumc Health Academy, Research in Learning and Education, Radboud University Medical Center, Post box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

4 Department of Occupational Therapy, School of Rehabilitation, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran


Background: Evaluation of educational services through appropriate tools is very important. The present study was conducted to translate the Evaluation and Feedback for Effective Clinical Education (EFFECT) questionnaire from English into Persian and assess the validity and reliability of the translated version.
Method: Initially, the EFFECT questionnaire was translated from English into Persian based on the International Quality of life Assessment (IQOLA) for cultural adaptation. To quantitatively evaluate the content validity of the questionnaire, the content validity ratio (CVR) and the content validity index (CVI) were used. To assess internal consistency, ninety-four occupational therapy students completed the translated EFFECT questionnaire. To measure test-retest reliability, 35 occupational therapy students filled out the translated questionnaire again after two weeks interval.
Results: The EFFECT scores of the items ranged from 3.95 to 4.77, all of which were at an acceptable level. The CVR scores of 48 items (necessity) were higher than 0.59. Seven items received CVR scores of less than 0.59. Fifty-one items obtained CVI scores of higher than 0.79 (clarity). Four items did not achieve a minimum acceptable score of 0.79. The test-retest reliability range of 0.75 to 0.91. The Cronbach’s alpha varied from 0.84 to 0.94, revealing a very desirable internal consistency in all seven domains. The total value of Cronbach’s alpha was 0.98.
Conclusion: The Persian version of the EFFECT questionnaire has good validity and reliability in occupational therapy education and can be employed as an appropriate tool to assess the quality of clinical education in occupational therapy.


  1. Pashmdarfard M, Shafaroodi N. Factors affecting the clinical education of rehabilitation students in Iran: A systematic review. Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran. 2018; 32: 114.
  2. Rezaee M, Rassafiani M, Khankeh H, Hosseini MA. Experiences of occupational therapy students in the first fieldwork education: a qualitative study. Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran. 2014; 28: 110.
  3. Kramer P, Stern K. Approaches to improving student performance on fieldwork. Am J Occup Ther. 1995; 49 (2): 156-9.
  4. Rodger S, Thomas Y, Greber C, Broadbridge J, Edwards A, Newton J, et al. Attributes of excellence in practice educators: The perspectives of Australian occupational therapy students. Aust Occup Ther J. 2014; 61 (3): 159-67.
  5. Abotalebi G, Vosoghi N, Sajadi A, Akbary M. Evaluation of clinical education from the perspective of nursing students of Ardabil University of Medical Science in 2009. Journal of health. 2010; 1 (1): 31-7.
  6. Sokhandani M. The View Point of Nursing and Midwifery Students about Characteristics of Effective Clinical Instructors. Media journal, 2012. 3(1): 20-25. Persian.
  7. Thompson JE. Competencies for midwifery teachers. Midwifery. 2002; 18 (4): 256-9.
  8. Fluit C, Bolhuis S, Grol R, Ham M, Feskens R, Laan R, et al. Evaluation and feedback for effective clinical teaching in postgraduate medical education: Validation of an assessment instrument incorporating the Can MEDS roles. Med teach. 2012; 34 (11): 893-901.
  9. Fluit CR, Bolhuis S, Grol R, Laan R, Wensing M. Assessing the quality of clinical teachers. J Gen Intern Med. 2010; 25 (12): 1337-45.
  10. Leung W- Competency based medical training. British medical journal. 2002.
  11. Fluit CR, Feskens R, Bolhuis S, Grol R, Wensing M, Laan R. Understanding resident ratings of teaching in the workplace: a multi-center study. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2015; 20 (3): 691-707.
  12. Fluit Cv, Bolhuis S, Klaassen T, de Visser M, Grol R, Laan R, et al. Residents provide feedback to their clinical teachers: reflection through dialogue. Med teach. 2013; 35 (9): e1485-e92.
  13. Mohammad Beigi A, Mohammad Salehi N, Golmohammad A. Validity and reliability of instruments and various measurement techniques in applied health research. Scientific Journal of Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences. 2015; 13(12), 1153-70.
  14. Lynn MR. Determination and quantification of content validity. Nurs Res. 1986; 35 (6): 382-6.
  15. Eglė Vaižg ė lienė, Žilvinas Padaiga, Daiva Rastenytė, Algimantas Tamelis, Kęstutis Petrikonis RK, Cornelia Fluit. Validation of the EFFECT questionnaire for competence-based clinical teaching in residency training in Lithuania. Medicine. 2017 (53): 173-8.