ArticleInteractive journal of medical research2022
Statistical Methods for Item Reduction in a Representative Lifestyle Questionnaire: Pilot Questionnaire Study.
Article in Interactive journal of medical research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of structured preceptorship on clinical reasoning of pediatric residents in Indonesia: a randomized controlled trial.Korean journal of medical education · 2026Trial
- Psychometrics of the modified family-centered care assessment short version for childhood obesity.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2024Trial
- The Impact of Generative Artificial Intelligence Use on Perceived English Learning Achievement: The Roles of Use Behavior and Task-Technology Fit.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Surveys in clinical research: methodological aspects and practical guidance.Critical care science · 2026Review
- A brief xerostomia inventory for young adults.PloS one · 2026Article
- Measuring meaningful outcomes for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a narrative review and critical appraisal of the Scoliosis Research Society-22 revised (SRS-22r) instrument.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2025Review
- A psychometric analysis of the Stress Management Competency Indicator Tool.Occupational medicine (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Development and validation of the Food Noise Questionnaire.Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.) · 2025Article
- Introducing the ELPIS scale: a novel tool for measuring emotional empathy toward cancer patients.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2024Article
- Psychometrics of the modified Family-Centered Care Assessment short version for childhood obesity.Research square · 2024Article
- Decision of the Optimal Rank of a Nonnegative Matrix Factorization Model for Gene Expression Data Sets Utilizing the Unit Invariant Knee Method: Development and Evaluation of the Elbow Method for Rank Selection.JMIR bioinformatics and biotechnology · 2023Article
- Development and validation of the patient reported outcomes questionnaire of children with asthma in China: A Caregiver's proxy-reported measure.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Article
- 15-item Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ-15): structural and criterion validity on patients with chronic low back pain.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
- The Acceptability of Traditional Culture under the Background of Deep Learning.Computational intelligence and neuroscience · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundReducing the number of items in a questionnaire while maintaining relevant information is important as it is associated with advantages such as higher respondent engagement and reduced response error. However, in health care, after the original design, an a posteriori check of the included items in a questionnaire is often overlooked or considered to be of minor importance. When conducted, this is often based on a single selected method. We argue that before finalizing any lifestyle questionnaire, a posteriori validation should always be conducted using multiple approaches to ensure the robustness of the results.
objectiveThe objectives of this study are to compare the results of two statistical methods for item reduction (variance inflation factor [VIF] and factor analysis [FA]) in a lifestyle questionnaire constructed by combining items from different sources and analyze the different results obtained from the 2 methods and the conclusions that can be made about the original items.
methodsData were collected from 79 participants (heterogeneous in age and sex) with a high risk of metabolic syndrome working in a financial company based in Tokyo. The lifestyle questionnaire was constructed by combining items (asked with daily, weekly, and monthly frequency) from multiple validated questionnaires and other selected questions. Item reduction was conducted using VIF and exploratory FA. Adequacy tests were used to check the data distribution and sampling adequacy.
resultsAmong the daily and weekly questions, both VIF and FA identified redundancies in sleep-related items. Among the monthly questions, both approaches identified redundancies in stress-related items. However, the number of items suggested for reduction often differed: VIF suggested larger reductions than FA for daily questions but fewer reductions for weekly questions. Adequacy tests always confirmed that the structural detection was adequate for the considered items.
conclusionsAs expected, our analyses showed that VIF and FA produced both similar and different findings, suggesting that questionnaire designers should consider using multiple methods for item reduction. Our findings using both methods indicate that many questions, especially those related to sleep, are redundant, indicating that the considered lifestyle questionnaire can be shortened.
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.