Cargando…

Reliability and validity of the Healthy Fitness Measurement Scale Version 1.0 (HFMS V1.0) in Chinese people

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the reliability and validity of Healthy Fitness Measurement Scale Version 1.0 (HFMS V1.0) for different population cohorts in the city of Guangzhou, Guangdong, China and to provide evidence and tools for further evaluation of healthy fitness of Chinese population and relate...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Qiu, Heng, Huang, Chen, Liu, Qian, Jiang, Lijie, Xue, Yunlian, Wu, Weixuan, Huang, Zhuomin, Xu, Jun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8655532/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34876418
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-048269
_version_ 1784612093514743808
author Qiu, Heng
Huang, Chen
Liu, Qian
Jiang, Lijie
Xue, Yunlian
Wu, Weixuan
Huang, Zhuomin
Xu, Jun
author_facet Qiu, Heng
Huang, Chen
Liu, Qian
Jiang, Lijie
Xue, Yunlian
Wu, Weixuan
Huang, Zhuomin
Xu, Jun
author_sort Qiu, Heng
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To investigate the reliability and validity of Healthy Fitness Measurement Scale Version 1.0 (HFMS V1.0) for different population cohorts in the city of Guangzhou, Guangdong, China and to provide evidence and tools for further evaluation of healthy fitness of Chinese population and related factors. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Urban neighbourhood and Medical University. PARTICIPANTS: Elderly people (n=393; mean age 68.27±6.38 years; 53.18% male), university students (n=390; mean age 19.29±1.29 years; 38.21% male) and urban residents (n=393; mean age 32.23±9.41 years; 44.78% male). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were evaluated the reliability and validity of HFMS V1.0 by internal consistency evaluation, split-half reliability, test–retest reliability, convergent and discriminant construct validity, and factor analysis. RESULTS: The Cronbach’s α coefficients for HFMS V1.0 were all greater than 0.85 for overall scale of total samples and three individual groups, and the split-half reliability and intragroup correlation coefficients were both greater than 0.70 (p<0.01). The correlation of each item, dimension and subscales ranged from 0.52 to 0.91 (p < 0.01). A total of 10 factors were screened by exploratory factor analysis with the cumulative contribution rate of 61.40%, basically consistent with the theoretical structure of scale. The confirmatory factor analysis indicated good fit: CMIN/DF=3.45, root mean square error of approximation=0.05, GFI=0.91, AGFI=0.90, IFI=0.90, comparative fit index=0.90. CONCLUSION: HFMS V1.0 showed acceptable reliability and validity in the test of healthy fitness of general population in Guangzhou. This scale could be a reliable measurement tool for evaluation of healthy fitness and potential risk factors.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8655532
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86555322021-12-27 Reliability and validity of the Healthy Fitness Measurement Scale Version 1.0 (HFMS V1.0) in Chinese people Qiu, Heng Huang, Chen Liu, Qian Jiang, Lijie Xue, Yunlian Wu, Weixuan Huang, Zhuomin Xu, Jun BMJ Open Public Health OBJECTIVE: To investigate the reliability and validity of Healthy Fitness Measurement Scale Version 1.0 (HFMS V1.0) for different population cohorts in the city of Guangzhou, Guangdong, China and to provide evidence and tools for further evaluation of healthy fitness of Chinese population and related factors. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Urban neighbourhood and Medical University. PARTICIPANTS: Elderly people (n=393; mean age 68.27±6.38 years; 53.18% male), university students (n=390; mean age 19.29±1.29 years; 38.21% male) and urban residents (n=393; mean age 32.23±9.41 years; 44.78% male). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were evaluated the reliability and validity of HFMS V1.0 by internal consistency evaluation, split-half reliability, test–retest reliability, convergent and discriminant construct validity, and factor analysis. RESULTS: The Cronbach’s α coefficients for HFMS V1.0 were all greater than 0.85 for overall scale of total samples and three individual groups, and the split-half reliability and intragroup correlation coefficients were both greater than 0.70 (p<0.01). The correlation of each item, dimension and subscales ranged from 0.52 to 0.91 (p < 0.01). A total of 10 factors were screened by exploratory factor analysis with the cumulative contribution rate of 61.40%, basically consistent with the theoretical structure of scale. The confirmatory factor analysis indicated good fit: CMIN/DF=3.45, root mean square error of approximation=0.05, GFI=0.91, AGFI=0.90, IFI=0.90, comparative fit index=0.90. CONCLUSION: HFMS V1.0 showed acceptable reliability and validity in the test of healthy fitness of general population in Guangzhou. This scale could be a reliable measurement tool for evaluation of healthy fitness and potential risk factors. BMJ Publishing Group 2021-12-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8655532/ /pubmed/34876418 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-048269 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Public Health
Qiu, Heng
Huang, Chen
Liu, Qian
Jiang, Lijie
Xue, Yunlian
Wu, Weixuan
Huang, Zhuomin
Xu, Jun
Reliability and validity of the Healthy Fitness Measurement Scale Version 1.0 (HFMS V1.0) in Chinese people
title Reliability and validity of the Healthy Fitness Measurement Scale Version 1.0 (HFMS V1.0) in Chinese people
title_full Reliability and validity of the Healthy Fitness Measurement Scale Version 1.0 (HFMS V1.0) in Chinese people
title_fullStr Reliability and validity of the Healthy Fitness Measurement Scale Version 1.0 (HFMS V1.0) in Chinese people
title_full_unstemmed Reliability and validity of the Healthy Fitness Measurement Scale Version 1.0 (HFMS V1.0) in Chinese people
title_short Reliability and validity of the Healthy Fitness Measurement Scale Version 1.0 (HFMS V1.0) in Chinese people
title_sort reliability and validity of the healthy fitness measurement scale version 1.0 (hfms v1.0) in chinese people
topic Public Health
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8655532/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34876418
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-048269
work_keys_str_mv AT qiuheng reliabilityandvalidityofthehealthyfitnessmeasurementscaleversion10hfmsv10inchinesepeople
AT huangchen reliabilityandvalidityofthehealthyfitnessmeasurementscaleversion10hfmsv10inchinesepeople
AT liuqian reliabilityandvalidityofthehealthyfitnessmeasurementscaleversion10hfmsv10inchinesepeople
AT jianglijie reliabilityandvalidityofthehealthyfitnessmeasurementscaleversion10hfmsv10inchinesepeople
AT xueyunlian reliabilityandvalidityofthehealthyfitnessmeasurementscaleversion10hfmsv10inchinesepeople
AT wuweixuan reliabilityandvalidityofthehealthyfitnessmeasurementscaleversion10hfmsv10inchinesepeople
AT huangzhuomin reliabilityandvalidityofthehealthyfitnessmeasurementscaleversion10hfmsv10inchinesepeople
AT xujun reliabilityandvalidityofthehealthyfitnessmeasurementscaleversion10hfmsv10inchinesepeople