Brenda Heaton1,2, Julie A Wright3, Julia C Bond4,5, Lisa M Quintiliani6. 1. Department of Health Policy and Health Services Research, Boston University Henry M. Goldman School of Dental Medicine, 560 Harrison Avenue, 3rd floor, Rm 336, Boston, MA, 02118, USA. brenda9@bu.edu. 2. Department of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, 560 Harrison Avenue, 3rd floor, Rm 336, Boston, MA, 02118, USA. brenda9@bu.edu. 3. Department of Exercise and Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA, USA. 4. Department of Health Policy and Health Services Research, Boston University Henry M. Goldman School of Dental Medicine, 560 Harrison Avenue, 3rd floor, Rm 336, Boston, MA, 02118, USA. 5. Department of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, 560 Harrison Avenue, 3rd floor, Rm 336, Boston, MA, 02118, USA. 6. Section of General Internal Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption is an important behavior that can influence individuals' risk for diabetes, obesity, and other chronic diseases. Nonetheless, there is a lack of valid measures to assess SSB-related constructs. Reliable and valid measures can help evaluate the efficacy of interventions designed to curb SSB consumption. Our aim was to develop a valid and reliable instrument to measure constructs related to SSB consumption in English and Spanish. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among a convenience sample of 150 adult residents of public housing developments in Boston, Massachusetts between July of 2016 and January of 2017. All households from two public housing developments were approached by study staff to solicit participation via door-to-door knocking and posted flyers. We developed questions to measure three SSB-related constructs informed by the Social Cognitive Theory: SSB knowledge, and self-efficacy and intention to act on SSB consumption. The questions were pilot tested in the population, and then administered in-person by bilingual study staff in either English or Spanish. Interviews were conducted most often in the participant's home and less frequently within a community space. Item normality was assessed with descriptive statistics. Difficulty of knowledge items was assessed with percent correct. Construct validity of self-efficacy items was assessed using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). A model was considered a good fit if confirmatory factor index (CFI) > 0.95, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) < 0.05, and standardized root mean square residual (RMSR) < 0.05. Pearson correlations with consumption scores assessed criterion validity, and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) assessed test-retest reliability. RESULTS: Of the eight knowledge items tested, only four items resulted in correct answers less than half of the time. CFA resulted in a 5-item scale with excellent fit indices (CFI = .99; RMSEA = .025: SRMR = .02) and Cronbach's (0.79), test-retest (ICC = 0.68), and significant correlation with intention and SSB consumption. Of the four intention items, one was significantly correlated with SSB consumption. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence for the validity of key constructs related to SSB consumption for use in adults, which could provide important theory-based markers for program evaluations of SSB-related interventions.
BACKGROUND: Sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption is an important behavior that can influence individuals' risk for diabetes, obesity, and other chronic diseases. Nonetheless, there is a lack of valid measures to assess SSB-related constructs. Reliable and valid measures can help evaluate the efficacy of interventions designed to curb SSB consumption. Our aim was to develop a valid and reliable instrument to measure constructs related to SSB consumption in English and Spanish. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among a convenience sample of 150 adult residents of public housing developments in Boston, Massachusetts between July of 2016 and January of 2017. All households from two public housing developments were approached by study staff to solicit participation via door-to-door knocking and posted flyers. We developed questions to measure three SSB-related constructs informed by the Social Cognitive Theory: SSB knowledge, and self-efficacy and intention to act on SSB consumption. The questions were pilot tested in the population, and then administered in-person by bilingual study staff in either English or Spanish. Interviews were conducted most often in the participant's home and less frequently within a community space. Item normality was assessed with descriptive statistics. Difficulty of knowledge items was assessed with percent correct. Construct validity of self-efficacy items was assessed using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). A model was considered a good fit if confirmatory factor index (CFI) > 0.95, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) < 0.05, and standardized root mean square residual (RMSR) < 0.05. Pearson correlations with consumption scores assessed criterion validity, and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) assessed test-retest reliability. RESULTS: Of the eight knowledge items tested, only four items resulted in correct answers less than half of the time. CFA resulted in a 5-item scale with excellent fit indices (CFI = .99; RMSEA = .025: SRMR = .02) and Cronbach's (0.79), test-retest (ICC = 0.68), and significant correlation with intention and SSB consumption. Of the four intention items, one was significantly correlated with SSB consumption. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence for the validity of key constructs related to SSB consumption for use in adults, which could provide important theory-based markers for program evaluations of SSB-related interventions.
Entities:
Keywords:
Adults; Factor analysis; Health status disparities; Psychometrics; Public housing; Sugar-sweetened beverages; Surveys and questionnaires
Authors: Marci Kramish Campbell; Dale McLerran; Gabrielle Turner-McGrievy; Ziding Feng; Stephen Havas; Glorian Sorensen; David Buller; Shirley A A Beresford; Linda Nebeling Journal: Ann Behav Med Date: 2008-02-16
Authors: Vasanti S Malik; Yanping Li; An Pan; Lawrence De Koning; Eva Schernhammer; Walter C Willett; Frank B Hu Journal: Circulation Date: 2019-04-30 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Valisa E Hedrick; Jyoti Savla; Dana L Comber; Kyle D Flack; Paul A Estabrooks; Phyllis A Nsiah-Kumi; Stacie Ortmeier; Brenda M Davy Journal: J Acad Nutr Diet Date: 2012-06 Impact factor: 4.910
Authors: Erika Bonnevie; Orville Morales; Sarah D Rosenberg; Jaclyn Goldbarg; Maggie Silver; Ellen Wartella; Joe Smyser Journal: Prev Med Date: 2020-03-20 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: M M Henshaw; B Borrelli; S E Gregorich; B Heaton; E M Tooley; W Santo; N F Cheng; M Rasmussen; S Helman; S Shain; R I Garcia Journal: JDR Clin Trans Res Date: 2018-08-22
Authors: Monica L Wang; Marisa Otis; Milagros C Rosal; Christina F Griecci; Stephenie C Lemon Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2019-07-30 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Isna A Fajarini; Mika Matsuzaki; Cara F Ruggiero; Caroline R Wensel; Sangwon Chung; Laura Hopkins; Lisa Poirier; Uriyoán Colón-Ramos; Joel Gittelsohn Journal: Nutrients Date: 2021-12-17 Impact factor: 5.717