ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2014
Psychometric testing of an instrument designed to measure nutritional perceptions of hypertensive patients.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validity, reliability, and factor analysis of organoleptic tests of Dangke Deppamil as an alternative treatment of nutrition problems in pregnant women in Indonesia.Journal of education and health promotion · 2024Article
- Prevalence, Awareness, Treatment, and Control of Hypertension in an Isfahan State Institution Sample.The journal of Tehran Heart Center · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMeasurement tools designed to ensure the achievements of studies' objectives must be evaluated. Based on the health promotion model (HPM), the present study was conducted to assess the validity and reliability of the designed questionnaire of hypertensive patients' nutritional perceptions. METHODOLOGY: In a cross-sectional study, the mentioned questionnaire was assessed based on opinions of 11 experienced faculty members and 671 hypertensive patients in rural areas in the year 2013. To evaluate the reliability, internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) was calculated. Concerning the validity of the questionnaire, its content and construct validity were examined. Data analysis was performed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 18 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).
resultsSpearman-Brown and Cronbach's alpha coefficients results were acceptable in all constructs indicating a satisfactory reliability of the questionnaire. Questionnaire's questions were highly correlated with the total score signifying the internal consistency of the questions; therefore, all questions had a similar effect on the total score and the removal of each did no increase the alpha significantly (all questions had acceptable reliability). Factor analyses showed that all questions had acceptable factor loading and suitable validity. Moreover, the entire constructs of the questionnaire were approved by experts with high validity coefficient of 0.9.
conclusionThe designed questionnaire for assessment of the HPM constructs regarding hypertensive patients' nutritional issues had appropriate psychometric characteristics. Reliability and validity of the questionnaire were also satisfactory and its overall structure was approved.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.