ArticleJournal of nutritional science2022
Validation of an instrument for perceived factors affecting fruit and vegetable intake based on Pender's health promotion model.
Article in Journal of nutritional science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Latent profile analysis of potential health-promoting behaviors in patients after esophageal cancer surgery: a multicenter cross-sectional survey.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Increasing fruit and vegetable (F&V) intake has a protective role against chronic conditions such as cardiovascular disease, cancer and diabetes. The present study aimed to validate an instrument for measuring the perception of effective factors on consumption behaviour of F&V based on Pender's health promotion model (HPM).This cross-sectional validation survey has consisted of five steps: literature review in order to plan and develop an instrument, face validity assessment, content validity assessment, reliability assessment and construct validity assessment with the cooperation of experts in health education, nutritionists and the target group (government employees). In the present study, reliability and validity of constructs were determined through Cronbach's alpha and exploratory factor analysis, respectively, in SPSS 22. The mean impact score was acceptable for 96·42 % of items in face validity. The mean scores of content validity ratio (CVR), content validity index (CVI) and reliability were 0·92, 0·97 and 0·96, respectively. According to the principal component analysis with varimax rotation, 104 items were identified in 15 factors contributing to 61·17 % of the model cumulative variance. Given the favourable scores of the research instrument in face validity, content validity and reliability as well as its ability to predict the extracted factors from the model, it can be used as a suitable instrument in future studies.
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.