Scale development and validation are critical to much of the work in the health, social, and behavioral sciences. However, the constellation of techniques required for scale development and evaluation can be onerous, jargon-filled, unfamiliar, and resource-intensive. Further, it is often not a part of graduate training. Therefore, our goal was to concisely review the process of scale development in as straightforward a manner as possible, both to facilitate the development of new, valid, and reliable scales, and to help improve existing ones. To do this, we have created a primer for best practices for scale development in measuring complex phenomena. This is not a systematic review, but rather the amalgamation of technical literature and lessons learned from our experiences spent creating or adapting a number of scales over the past several decades. We identified three phases that span nine steps. In the first phase, items are generated and the validity of their content is assessed. In the second phase, the scale is constructed. Steps in scale construction include pre-testing the questions, administering the survey, reducing the number of items, and understanding how many factors the scale captures. In the third phase, scale evaluation, the number of dimensions is tested, reliability is tested, and validity is assessed. We have also added examples of best practices to each step. In sum, this primer will equip both scientists and practitioners to understand the ontology and methodology of scale development and validation, thereby facilitating the advancement of our understanding of a range of health, social, and behavioral outcomes.

The appropriate measurement of food security is critical for targeting food and economic aid; supporting early famine warning and global monitoring systems; evaluating nutrition, health, and development programs; and informing government policy across many sectors. This important work is complicated by the multiple approaches and tools for assessing food security. In response, we have prepared a compendium and review of food security assessment tools in which we review issues of terminology, measurement, and validation. We begin by describing the evolving definition of food security and use this discussion to frame a review of the current landscape of measurement tools available for assessing food security. We critically assess the purpose/s of these tools, the domains of food security assessed by each, the conceptualizations of food security that underpin each metric, as well as the approaches that have been used to validate these metrics. Specifically, we describe measurement tools that 1) provide national-level estimates of food security, 2) inform global monitoring and early warning systems, 3) assess household food access and acquisition, and 4) measure food consumption and utilization. After describing a number of outstanding measurement challenges that might be addressed in future research, we conclude by offering suggestions to guide the selection of appropriate food security metrics.

Food insecurity, which affects >1 billion people worldwide, is inextricably linked to the HIV epidemic. We present a conceptual framework of the m

Objective Progress towards equitable and sufficient water has primarily been measured by population-level data on water availability. However, higher-resolution measures of water accessibility, adequacy, reliability and safety (ie, water insecurity) are needed to understand how problems with water impact health and well-being. Therefore, we developed the Household Water InSecurity Experiences (HWISE) Scale to measure household water insecurity in an equivalent way across disparate cultural and ecological settings. Methods Cross-sectional surveys were implemented in 8127 households across 28 sites in 23 low-income and middle-income countries. Data collected included 34 items on water insecurity in the prior month; socio-demographics; water acquisition, use and storage; household food insecurity and perceived stress. We retained water insecurity items that were salient and applicable across all sites. We used classical test and item response theories to assess dimensionality, reliability and equivalence. Construct validity was assessed for both individual and pooled sites using random coefficient models. Findings Twelve items about experiences of household water insecurity were retained. Items showed unidimensionality in factor analyses and were reliable (Cronbach’s alpha 0.84 to 0.93). The average non-invariance rate was 0.03% (threshold <25%), indicating equivalence of measurement and meaning across sites. Predictive, convergent and discriminant validity were also established. Conclusions The HWISE Scale measures universal experiences of household water insecurity across low-income and middle-income countries. Its development ushers in the ability to quantify the prevalence, causes and consequences of household water insecurity, and can contribute an evidence base for clinical, public health and policy recommendations regarding water.