ArticleBMJ open2025
Development and cross-validation of a short questionnaire to evaluate self-reported positive health: a cross-sectional panel study of structural validity among a general Dutch population.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
- The broad positive health perspective on health as common ground for tackling current and future interdisciplinary health challenges.Frontiers in public health · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to further develop and cross-validate a short questionnaire to measure self-reported Positive Health in general (Dutch) populations for evaluative purposes, stemming from the original 42 items of the My Positive Health (MPH) dialogue tool. Positive Health refers to 'health from the perspective of patients and citizens' following the concept of Huber DESIGN AND
settingA cross-sectional study was performed among a panel representative for the general adult Dutch population living at home.
participantsThe response rate was 76%, 1327 of a total of 2457 respondents were female, and mean age (years) was 53.3±17.8.
methodsFirst, item reduction was carried out through content discussions following statistical output retrieved from factor structures and loadings, inter-item correlations and internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha). Next, among the other half of the study population, measurement properties for the developed short questionnaire were calculated using goodness of fit indices from confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).
resultsThe item reduction process (n=1199) resulted in a questionnaire of 22 items (PH22) with a four-factor structure and explained variance of 62.4%. Cronbach's alpha values were 0.84, 0.92, 0.81 and 0.78 for the renamed factors 'Physical fitness' (5 items), 'Contentment with self, others and life' (nine items), 'Daily life management' (5 items) and 'Future perspective' (3 items), respectively. Cross-validation (n=1258) showed adequate goodness-of-fit indices of the PH22, based on both first-order and second-order CFA. The scores of the PH22 were normally distributed. No floor or ceiling effects were present.
conclusionsA short 22-item questionnaire to measure self-reported Positive Health in a general (Dutch) population for evaluative purposes such as scientific or policy research at Positive Health or patient-centred interventions was developed and cross-validated, named PH22. This study supports its structural validity. To use this questionnaire in practice, its test-retest reliability and responsiveness should also be known. Future research has to reveal this.
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.