ArticleJournal of exercise science and fitness2024
Psychometric property and measurement invariance of perceived benefits and barriers of physical activity in Chinese adolescents.
Article in Journal of exercise science and fitness, 2024. 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.
- Patient-Reported Experiences in Chronic Dermatological Conditions: Validation of the Romanian PSPSQ 2.0 Within Contemporary Dermatologic Care Pathways.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The perceived benefits and barriers to physical activity play crucial roles in determining daily physical activity levels. However, previous studies have employed tools lacking adequate validation, leading to inconsistent conclusions about the impact of these two factors. Therefore, this national, population-based study was conducted to assess the psychometric properties, measurement invariance, and predictive validity of the Chinese versions of the perceived benefits (C-PBEPA) and barriers to physical activity (C-PBAPA) scales. Methods: The final sample (N = 2942, 49.3 % for boys) was randomly split into two subsamples. The first subsample was used for exploratory factor analysis and the second subsample was used for confirmatory factor analysis. Measurement invariance across gender and age groups were examined. Structural equation models were developed to examine the predictive validity of the revised C-PBEPA and C-PBAPA on moderate to vigorous PA. Results: The results showed that both scales were unidimensional, had excellent model fit (e.g., Conclusion: The study demonstrated that the revised C-PBEPA and C-PBAPA are valid scales for measuring Chinese adolescents' perceived benefits and barriers to PA.
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.