% Generated by roxygen2: do not edit by hand
% Please edit documentation in R/data.R
\docType{data}
\name{cvi_example}
\alias{cvi_example}
\title{Example expert ratings for content validity analysis}
\format{
A 6 by 10 numeric matrix with rows representing expert raters
(\code{expert1} through \code{expert6}) and columns representing candidate items
(\code{item1} through \code{item10}). Values are on a 4-point relevance scale:
\itemize{
\item 1: not relevant
\item 2: somewhat relevant (item needs major revision)
\item 3: quite relevant (item needs minor revision)
\item 4: highly relevant
}
}
\source{
Simulated for demonstration; not based on real expert ratings.
}
\usage{
cvi_example
}
\description{
A simulated dataset illustrating typical expert ratings during the content
validation of a 10-item depression screening instrument. Six expert
clinicians rate each item's relevance on a 4-point scale.
}
\details{
The pattern of ratings is realistic: some items achieve universal
agreement, most show strong but imperfect agreement, and a couple of
items would be flagged for revision based on standard CVI cutoffs
(e.g., items 5 and 9 in this example).
}
\examples{
data(cvi_example)
icvi(cvi_example)
content_validity(cvi_example)
}
\keyword{datasets}
