Psychometric Assessment of the Persian Version of the Structured Multidisciplinary Work Evaluation Tool (SMET) Questionnaire among Nurses

MasoumehAlsadat  Mousavi kani; Zeinab  Kazemi; Marzieh Izadi  Laybidi; Ehsan  Garosi; Jamileh  Abolghasemi; Mohammad Sadegh  Ghasemi

doi:10.18502/jhsw.v15i2.21396

MasoumehAlsadat Mousavi kani Department of Ergonomics, School of Public Health, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Zeinab Kazemi Department of Industrial Engineering, Clemson University, Clemson, SC, USA
Marzieh Izadi Laybidi Department of Ergonomics, School of Public Health, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Ehsan Garosi Department of Ergonomics, School of Public Health, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Jamileh Abolghasemi Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Mohammad Sadegh Ghasemi Department of Ergonomics, School of Public Health, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18502/jhsw.v15i2.21396

Keywords: Work environment, Structured multidisciplinary work evaluation tool (SMET), Physical exposure, Environmental exposure, Psychosocial exposure, Nurses, Validity, Reliability

Abstract

Introduction: Nurses play a crucial role in hospital settings, often undertaking demanding tasks thatexceed their physical and cognitive capacities. The Structured Multidisciplinary Work Evaluation Tool(SMET) is an instrument for evaluating and identifying risks in workplace environments. The objective ofthis study was to assess the psychometric properties of the Persian (Farsi) version of the SMET.

Material and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, the face and content validity of the questionnairewere evaluated both qualitatively and quantitatively by a panel of 13 experts. Quantitative content validitywas performed using the Content Validity Ratio (CVR) and Content Validity Index (CVI). Reliability wasmeasured using Cronbach’s alpha and Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC).

Results: The face validity assessment revealed that questions 3, 4, 6, 23, and 24 required clarification.The CVI for all items was calculated to be above 0.79. However, several questions had a CVR below0.54, indicating that specialists considered some questions unnecessary or repetitive. Consequently,these questions were either removed or merged with similar items based on the scores and subsequentreviews. Cronbach’s alpha and ICC values for the entire questionnaire and its dimensions were above 0.7,indicating acceptable to strong reliability.

Conclusion: The Persian version of the SMET questionnaire demonstrated acceptable psychometricproperties for comprehensive multifactorial evaluation of healthcare workplaces