Introduction: In contemporary healthcare education, the integration of technology has emerged as an essential factor in enhancing the efficiency and efficacy of training methodologies. Particularly within the domain of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training, the adoption of technology-driven approaches holds considerable potential for enriching the skills and proficiencies of healthcare practitioners. Through the utilization of innovative technologies, such as simulation software and leveraging smartphones as primary tools, CPR training programs can be customized to provide immersive, interactive, and authentic learning experiences. This study aims to validate a comprehensive CPR training module tailored explicitly for healthcare professionals, to integrate it into smartphones as a medium for delivering CPR training. Methods: Two validity tests, namely content validity and face validity were conducted to evaluate the validity of the Smart-CPR training module. A self-constructed measurement scale was utilized to assess four parameters: consistency, representativeness, clarity, and relevancy. Content validity employed the content validity ratio, with scores ranging between 1 and −1, indicating the level of consensus among experts regarding the significance of each item. Face validity was assessed using two indices: the item face validity index and the scale face validity index. Ratings of 3 or 4 were given a score of 1, while ratings of 1 or 2 received a score of 0. Result: The content validity shows that CVI values for ‘consistency’ and ‘representativeness’ were 0.99 for the module and questionnaire, and 0.96 and 0.97, respectively. ‘Clarity’ scored 0.99 for the module and 0.96 for the questionnaire, while ‘relevance’ achieved 0.99 for both. All 44 items exceeded the 0.83 threshold for face validity. The Lawshe’s content validity ratio (CVR) and content validity index (CVI) value were used to evaluate the content validity of both the CRSTP module and questionnaire, with CVR values result ranging from 0.80 to 0.99 across dimensions. These findings demonstrate robust content validity. Additionally, high CVI scores, mostly exceeding 0.95, suggest favorable outcomes and indicate no need for revisions. In face validity method, all 44 items surpassed the minimum threshold of 0.83, signifying a favourable outcome. Thus, all items were deemed acceptable. Conclusion: The Smart-CPR training module and questionnaires were meticulously developed to meet both face and content validity standards. All 44 items demonstrated appropriate levels of validity, ensuring they effectively enhance and maintain CPR competency among healthcare providers and potentially benefit the broader community. The positive results of the Smart-CPR training module confirm the high validity of the CPR competency assessment. Content validity, evaluated by experts, received a perfect score, demonstrating agreement on the relevance of each module component. Similarly, face validity, assessed by healthcare professionals, also received a flawless score, indicating consensus on the module’s clarity and relevance. These findings validate the module’s effectiveness in teaching CPR techniques to a diverse audience and ensuring compliance with established standards. With such strong validity, digitizing the module becomes more straightforward, facilitating easier sharing and use across digital platforms. Ultimately, the module’s high validity facilitates its integration into digital platforms, thereby enhancing CPR education and improving outcomes during real emergencies.

Ahn, C., Cho, Y., Oh, J., et al. (2016). Evaluation of Smartphone Applications for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Training in South Korea. BioMed Research International, 2016, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/6418710

Allen, M. S., Robson, D. A., & Iliescu, D. (2023). Face Validity. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 39(3), 153–156. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000777

Aranda-García, S., Otero-Agra, M., Fernández-Méndez, F., et al. (2023). Augmented reality training in basic life support with the help of smart glasses. A pilot study. Resuscitation Plus, 14, 100391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resplu.2023.100391

Ayre, C., & Scally, A. J. (2014). Critical Values for Lawshe’s Content Validity Ratio. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 47(1), 79–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0748175613513808

Barsom, E. Z. (2016). Systematic review on the effectiveness of augmented reality applications in medical training. Surgical Endoscopy, 30(10), 4174–4183.

Brown, L. E., & Halperin, H. (2018). CPR training in the United States: the need for a new gold standard (and the gold to create it) CPR training in the US. Circulation Research, 123(8), 950–952. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.118.313157

Calvo-Francés, F., Cilleros-Pino, L., Barraza-Illanes, P. A., et al. (2023). Validation of the knowledge evaluation questionnaire of the cardiopulmonary resuscitation training program in high school students. Medicine, 102(42), e34609. https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000034609

Chantarasombat, C., & Rooyuenyong, W. (2020). The Development of Learning Module of Educational Administration and Educational Institute for Students in Master of Education Degree in Thailand. World Journal of Education, 10(3), 19. https://doi.org/10.5430/wje.v10n3p19

Dankbaar, M. E. W., & de Jong, P. G. M. (2014). Technology for learning: how it has changed education. Perspectives on Medical Education, 3(4), 257–259. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-014-0141-0

Davis, L. L. (1992). Instrument review: getting the most from a panel of experts. Applied Nursing Research, 5(4), 194–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0897-1897(05)80008-4

Delasobera, B. E., Goodwin, T. L., Strehlow, M., et al. (2010). Evaluating the efficacy of simulators and multimedia for refreshing ACLS skills in India. Resuscitation, 81(2), 217–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2009.10.013

Desai, S., Patel, N. (2020). ABC of Face Validity for Questionnaire. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences Review and Research, 65(1), 164–168. https://doi.org/10.47583/ijpsrr.2020.v65i01.025

Ghazali, N., Sahari Nordin, M., Hashim, S., et al. (2017). Measuring content validity: Students’ self-efficacy and meaningful learning in massive open online course (MOOC) scale. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Education in Muslim Society (ICEMS 2017). pp. 128–133.

Gilbert, G. E., & Prion, S. (2016). Making sense of methods and measurement: Lawshe’s content validity index. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 12(12), 530–531.

Gugelmin-Almeida, D., Tobase, L., Polastri, T. F., et al. (2021). Do automated real-time feedback devices improve CPR quality? A systematic review of literature. Resuscitation Plus, 6, 100108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resplu.2021.100108

Guze, P. (2015). Using technology to meet the challenges of medical education. Transactions of the American Clinical and Climatological Association, 126, 260–270.

Kim, E. A., & Cho, K. J. (2023). Comparing the Effectiveness of Two New CPR Training Methods in Korea: Medical Virtual Reality Simulation and Flipped Learning. Iranian Journal of Public Health, 52(7), 1428–1438.

Kong, A. S. Y., Lai, K. S., Hee, C. W., et al. (2022). Oxidative stress parameters as biomarkers of cardiovascular disease towards the development and progression. Antioxidants, 11(6), 1175.

Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28, 563–575.

Lee, S. G. W., Hong, K. J., Lee, S. Y., et al. (2023). Efficacy of distance training program for cardiopulmonary resuscitation utilizing smartphone application and home delivery system. The American Journal of Emergency Medicine, 66, 67–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2023.01.026

Leung, L. (2015). Validity, reliability, and generalizability in qualitative research. Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care, 4(3), 324. https://doi.org/10.4103/2249-4863.161306

Ming, X., Lim, A., Liao, W. A., et al. (2022). The Effectiveness of Technology-Based Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Training on the Skills and Knowledge of Adolescents: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 24(12), e36423. https://doi.org/10.2196/36423

Ozair, M. M., Baharuddin, K. A., Mohamed, S. A., et al. (2017). Development and Validation of the Knowledge and Clinical Reasoning of Acute Asthma Management in Emergency Department (K-CRAMED). Education in Medicine Journal, 9(2), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.21315/eimj2017.9.2.1

Roebianto, A., Savitri, S. I., Aulia, I., et al. (2023). Content validity: Definition and procedure of content validation in psychological research. TPM, 30(1), 5–18.

Roy, R., Sukumar, G. M., Philip, M., et al. (2023). Face, content, criterion and construct validity assessment of a newly developed tool to assess and classify work-related stress (TAWS– 16). PLOS ONE, 18(1), e0280189. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0280189

Rubio, D. M., Berg-Weger, M., Tebb, S. S., et al. (2003). Objectifying content validity: Conducting a content validity study in social work research. Social Work Research, 27(2), 94–104. https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/27.2.94

Sand, K., Guldal, A. U., Myklebust, T. Å., et al. (2021). Cardiopulmonary resuscitation retention training for hospital nurses by a self-learner skill station or the traditional instructor led course: A randomised controlled trial. Resuscitation Plus, 7, 100157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resplu.2021.100157

Shafie, S., Abd Majid, F., Damio, S. M., et al. (2020). Evaluation on The Face and Content Validity of a Soft Skills Transfer of Training Instrument. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 10(10). https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v10-i10/8267

Shi, J., Mo, X., & Sun, Z. (2012). Content validity index in scale development. Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences, 37(2), 152–155.

Straub, D., & Gefen, D. (2004). Validation Guidelines for IS Positivist Research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 13. https://doi.org/10.17705/1cais.01324

Sürücü, L., & Maslakci, A. (2020). Validity and reliability in quantitative research. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 8(3), 2694–2726. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v8i3.1540

Tilden, V. P., Nelson, C., & May, B. A. (1990). Use of qualitative methods to enhance content validity. Nursing Researching. 39(3), 172–175. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-199005000-00015

Yaghmaie, F. (2003). Content validity and its estimation. Journal of Medical Education, 3(1), e105015.

Yusoff, M. S. B. (2019). ABC of Response Process Validation and Face Validity Index Calculation. Education in Medicine Journal, 11(3), 55–61. https://doi.org/10.21315/eimj2019.11.3.6