Importance of validity in clinical setting

Submitted by:

Hajra Khattak, Malaika Rehman,

Wajeeha Hassan and Zainab Aslam

Subject: Research Methods

Program: ADCP 1

Submitted to: Ma’am Tasneem

Department: Social Sciences and Humanity

Faculty: Applied Psychology

 Importance of validity in clinical setting

In any area, for a test to be valid is to measure what we think it is supposed to

measure and to be extremely specific. It becomes vital to utilize a valid test so that the results

can be accurately applied and interpreted. Valid psychological tests that are used by

professional clinicians enable them to make diagnoses more reliable, valid and quickly than

they can do from just personal observation and interviewing alone. Such tests can uncover

issues that a mental health professional may not detect until much later. Next, the major

purpose of each diagnosis is to decide regarding the application of most appropriate type of

therapy. This allows the clinician to focus on the appropriate treatment more quickly

therefore it saves time and money for the patient/client and saves efforts and time for the

practitioner as well which is only possible if the evaluation and assessing was done with

tested, evidenced-based valid tests. Once a course of treatment has begun, tests can further

help the clinician monitor the effectiveness of the treatment as it proceeds ahead. Applying an

invalid test means inaccurately measuring the problem and thus inaccurate diagnosis and

intervention is expected. This means clinicians activities; the assessment, diagnosis and

intervention all depend on a good, validated test which have been considered valid by

professionals and is clinically applicable if have validity value 7.5 or above. Similarly,

clinical research that yield valid findings are also of much value for clinical practicing area.

Having both valid research design and measurement processes are fundamental to a sound

clinical/psychological research. For example, in a study based on establishing an intervention,

low internal/external validity would inhibit us from drawing conclusion and results would be

unable to apply on different people other than those on whom the study was conducted. This

would ultimately lead to low adoption of the treatment tested in the study by other clinical

professionals. We can conclude that having updated and validated tests are fundamental for
eliminating risks associated with false diagnosis and inaccurate intervention which could

possibly put life of clients at stake.