Literature DB >> 4034513

Multivariate evaluation of health attitudes and behaviors: development and validation of a method for health promotion research.

J P Elder, L M Artz, P Beaudin, R A Carleton, T M Lasater, G Peterson, A Rodrigues, E Guadagnoli, W F Velicer.   

Abstract

Many self-reported measures of health status, attitudes, and knowledge used by clinicians and researchers suffer from a variety of shortcomings, including limited empirical justification, excessive complexity, assessments of nonmodifiable historic or hereditary factors, and limited utility for public health program planning. The Health Attitudes and Behavior Scale is an instrument designed to overcome many of these shortcomings and direct public health professionals toward more efficacious interventions. One hundred sixty-four subjects responded to true-false and Likert scale items related to health beliefs, attitudes, and behavioral practices. A principal component analysis of the Likert items yielded six components, tentatively labeled (a) Lack of Social Support, (b) Hurdles to Health, (c) Health Attitudes/Weight Concerns, (d) Positive Environment, (e) Disease Concerns, and (f) Time and Work Pressure. Analyses of these scales using coefficient alpha indicated adequate internal consistency for each of them. These scales were then related to demographic variables of age, educational level, sex, and marital status. Next, these scales were correlated with individual true-false items reflecting self-reported behavioral practices or health histories. A component analysis of the true-false items yielded four principal components labeled (a) Organizational Health Concerns, (b) Smoking and Exercise Concerns, (c) Coronary and Weight Concerns, and (d) Blood Pressure and Risk Factor Programs. Finally, a cluster analysis yielded six typical profiles reflecting different levels of the original six components. Of interest is the fact that the Lack of Social Support and Time and Work Pressure scales had a very limited integration into the overall patterns. The assumption that organizational and environmental factors can have an important impact on health was supported. The need for further research in this area is also discussed.

Mesh:

Year:  1985        PMID: 4034513     DOI: 10.1016/0091-7435(85)90019-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prev Med        ISSN: 0091-7435            Impact factor:   4.018


  7 in total

Review 1.  Evaluation in health education. A review of progress, possibilities, and problems.

Authors:  D Nutbeam; C Smith; J Catford
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 3.710

Review 2.  How to assess a survey report: a guide for readers and peer reviewers.

Authors:  Karen E A Burns; Michelle E Kho
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2015-02-17       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Evaluation of an internal review process for grants and manuscripts in the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group.

Authors:  Karen E A Burns; Elaine Caon; Peter M Dodek
Journal:  Can Respir J       Date:  2014-04-07       Impact factor: 2.409

4.  Reliability of health belief indexes: confirmatory factor analysis in sex, race, and age subgroups.

Authors:  J L Weissfeld; B M Brock; J P Kirscht; V M Hawthorne
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  1987-02       Impact factor: 3.402

5.  Is there a role for physician involvement in introducing research to surrogate decision makers in the intensive care unit? (The Approach trial: a pilot mixed methods study).

Authors:  K E A Burns; L Rizvi; O M Smith; Y Lee; J Lee; M Wang; M Brown; M Parker; A Premji; D Leung; M Hammond Mobilio; L Gotlib-Conn; R Nisenbaum; M Santos; Y Li; S Mehta
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2014-12-10       Impact factor: 17.440

6.  Factors affecting the use of neurally adjusted ventilatory assist in the adult critical care unit: a clinician survey.

Authors:  Philip Anthony Hopkins; Gerrard Francis Rafferty; Daniel Hadfield; Louise Rose; Fiona Reid; Victoria Cornelius; Nicholas Hart; Clare Finney; Bethany Penhaligon; Clare Harris; Sian Saha; Harriet Noble; John Smith
Journal:  BMJ Open Respir Res       Date:  2020-12

7.  Wean Earlier and Automatically with New technology (the WEAN study): a protocol of a multicentre, pilot randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Karen E A Burns; Maureen O Meade; Martin R Lessard; Sean P Keenan; Francois Lellouche
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2009-09-04       Impact factor: 2.279

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.