Editorial
Study validity
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/jips by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCywCX1AW
nYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC4/OAVpDDa8K2+Ya6H515kE= on 05/10/2023
The country on average produces 500 prosthodontic
research studies annually. Lesser studies among these are
getting translated into progressive research. These findings
are unable to translate to advanced stage due to major
limitations in the study design, methodology, motivation,
interest, and funding. The study design, instrumentation
used, and data collection make the inferences obtained from
these studies less valid. The validity of the study design
is essential for both in terms of internal acceptance for
standardization and in terms of external recognition for
universal acceptance.[1]
The name valid is derived from the Latin word validus
indicating strong. This implies that the design and
methodology followed should be strong and accepted
globally. Validity in the study design denotes that the
accuracy, trustworthiness of instruments used, and data
or findings collected are highly ordered and obtained
with a reduced systemic error. When the validity is within
acceptable limits, it aids in wider acceptance and it leads
to progressive research.
The validity is of two types: internal validity and
external validity. The internal validity is the steps
taken or standards followed by the researchers in the
study environment to obtain the truthful results. The
external validity is the generalization followed for
wider acceptance of global population. [2] Although
these validation procedures are essential for the clinical
studies, greater care is necessary for in vitro studies for
the progressive research.
Numerous factors affect the validity of the study.
The internal validity is affected by the size of the
subject/specimen, type or variability of the subject, attrition
of the samples, maturation, time taken for evaluation,
history, and instrument or assessment sensitivity.[3] The
external validity is controlled by population representation,
time/duration of evaluation, research environment,
researcher characteristics, data collection, interaction
of the subject to research, and control of independent
variables.[4] It is essential that these factors are understood
© 2018 The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society | Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 1
in study design and controlled for robust study design and
acceptance.
The study validity can be evaluated by translation or criteria.
It can also be measured by content, face, predictable,
creative, concurrent, convergent and divergent, or
dissimilar measures of validity.[4] The validity in the study
can be improved by defining the aim and objective of
the study, synchronizing the assessment measures to the
objectives. In addition, it is advisable to compare with
the outside environment or external measure for wider
acceptance.[5]
The structure of the study design can have different
levels of validity. The randomized clinical trial has
higher internal validity than cohort, case‑control, or
cross‑sectional studies. The observational studies have
higher external validity compared to interventional
studies. Adequate measure should be followed to
avoid the issues, and it has to be optimized to obtain
the essential validity in the study. The adaptation of
appropriate study protocols such as CONSORT and
STROBE aids in obtaining essential standardization.
In vitro studies following the regular guidelines listed by
the ISO, ADA, and BIS can establish higher norms and
acceptance.[6]
Adherence to the study design, protocol, and following
the validity measures aids in better appreciation of the
studies and can enhance the translatory research to an
advanced stage.
N. Gopi Chander
Professor, Department of Prosthodontics,
SRM Dental College, SRM University,
Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
Address for correspondence:
Dr. N. Gopi Chander,
496, 3rd Main Road, TNHB Colony, Velachery,
Chennai - 600 042,
Tamil Nadu, India.
E‑mail: drgopichander@gmail.com
 Chander: Study validity

REFERENCES This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution‑NonCommercial‑ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak,
1. Tunis SR, Stryer DB, Clancy CM. Practical clinical trials: Increasing and build upon the work non‑commercially, as long as the author is credited and the
the value of clinical research for decision making in clinical and health new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
policy. JAMA 2003;290:1624‑32.
2. Brewer M. Research design and issues of validity. In: Reis H, Judd C,
editors. Handbook of Research Methods in Social and Personality Access this article online
Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000.
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/jips by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCywCX1AW

Quick Response Code:

3. Wikipedia Contributors. Internal Validity. Wikipedia, The Free Website:
Encyclopedia; 21 July, 2017, Available from: https://www.en.wikipedia. www.j‑ips.org
org/w/index.php?title=Internal_validity and oldid=791618486. [Last
accessed on 2017 Dec 08, 11:54 UTC].
4. Wikipedia Contributors. External Validity. Wikipedia, The Free
nYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC4/OAVpDDa8K2+Ya6H515kE= on 05/10/2023

DOI:
Encyclopedia; 10 November, 2017. Available from: https:// 10.4103/jips.jips_322_17
www.en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=External_validit&
oldid=809572804. [Last accessed on 2017 Dec 08, 00:07 UTC].
5. Calder BJ, Phillips LW, Tybout AM. The concept of external validity.
J Consum Res 1983;10:112‑4.
How to cite this article: Chander NG. Study validity. J Indian Prosthodont
6. Chander NG. Standardization of in vitro studies. J Indian Prosthodont
Soc 2018;18:1-2.
Soc 2016;16:227‑8.

2 The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society | Volume 18 | Issue 1 | January-March 2018