Measuring Positive Health using the My Positive Health (MPH) and Individual Recovery Outcomes Counter (I.ROC) Dialogue Tools: A Panel Study on Measurement Properties in a Representative General Dutch Population

IF 2.8 3区社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY

Applied Research in Quality of Life Pub Date : 2024-08-22 DOI:10.1007/s11482-024-10356-3

Vera P. van Druten, Margot J. Metz, Jolanda J. P. Mathijssen, Dike van de Mheen, Marja van Vliet, Bridey Rudd, Esther de Vries, Lenny M. W. Nahar van - Venrooij

{"title":"Measuring Positive Health using the My Positive Health (MPH) and Individual Recovery Outcomes Counter (I.ROC) Dialogue Tools: A Panel Study on Measurement Properties in a Representative General Dutch Population","authors":"Vera P. van Druten, Margot J. Metz, Jolanda J. P. Mathijssen, Dike van de Mheen, Marja van Vliet, Bridey Rudd, Esther de Vries, Lenny M. W. Nahar van - Venrooij","doi":"10.1007/s11482-024-10356-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We aimed to investigate whether the dialogue tools My Positive Health (MPH) and Individual Recovery Outcomes Counter (I.ROC) tools were useful for quantitively measuring the positive health construct for monitoring and scientific purposes as well. An observational cross-sectional study was conducted in a representative general Dutch population (the LISS panel) to investigate factor structures and internal consistency from the 42-items MPH and 12-items I.ROC. After randomly splitting the dataset, principal component analysis (PCA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were applied. Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficient between both tools’ total scores were calculated. 2,457 participants completed the questionnaires. A six-factor structure was extracted for MPH (PH42) and a two-factor structure for I.ROC (I.ROC12). Explained variances were 68.1% and 56.1%, respectively. CFA resulted in good fit indices. Cronbach’s alphas were between 0.74 to 0.97 (PH42) and 0.73 to 0.87 (I.ROC12). Pearson correlation between the total scores was 0.8 and Spearman correlation was 0.77. Both PH42 and I.ROC12 are useful to quantitatively measure positive health aspects which can be summarised in sum scores. The dimensions found in this study and the corresponding item division differed from the dimensions of the original dialogue tools. Further research is recommended focussing on item reduction for PH42, factor structure of I.ROC, assessment of construct validity (in a general population) and response scales in more depth.","PeriodicalId":51483,"journal":{"name":"Applied Research in Quality of Life","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Research in Quality of Life","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-024-10356-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

We aimed to investigate whether the dialogue tools My Positive Health (MPH) and Individual Recovery Outcomes Counter (I.ROC) tools were useful for quantitively measuring the positive health construct for monitoring and scientific purposes as well. An observational cross-sectional study was conducted in a representative general Dutch population (the LISS panel) to investigate factor structures and internal consistency from the 42-items MPH and 12-items I.ROC. After randomly splitting the dataset, principal component analysis (PCA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were applied. Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficient between both tools’ total scores were calculated. 2,457 participants completed the questionnaires. A six-factor structure was extracted for MPH (PH42) and a two-factor structure for I.ROC (I.ROC12). Explained variances were 68.1% and 56.1%, respectively. CFA resulted in good fit indices. Cronbach’s alphas were between 0.74 to 0.97 (PH42) and 0.73 to 0.87 (I.ROC12). Pearson correlation between the total scores was 0.8 and Spearman correlation was 0.77. Both PH42 and I.ROC12 are useful to quantitatively measure positive health aspects which can be summarised in sum scores. The dimensions found in this study and the corresponding item division differed from the dimensions of the original dialogue tools. Further research is recommended focussing on item reduction for PH42, factor structure of I.ROC, assessment of construct validity (in a general population) and response scales in more depth.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

使用 "我的积极健康"（MPH）和 "个人康复结果计数器"（I.ROC）对话工具测量积极健康：关于具有代表性的荷兰普通人群测量特性的小组研究

我们的目的是调查 "我的积极健康"（MPH）对话工具和 "个人康复结果计数器"（I.ROC）工具是否有助于量化测量积极健康的概念，以达到监测和科学研究的目的。我们在具有代表性的荷兰普通人群（LISS 小组）中开展了一项观察性横断面研究，以调查 42 个项目的 MPH 和 12 个项目的 I.ROC 的因子结构和内部一致性。随机拆分数据集后，采用了主成分分析（PCA）和确证因子分析（CFA）。计算了两种工具总分之间的皮尔逊和斯皮尔曼相关系数。共有 2457 名参与者填写了问卷。MPH（PH42）提取了六因子结构，I.ROC（I.ROC12）提取了双因子结构。解释方差分别为 68.1%和 56.1%。CFA 的拟合指数良好。Cronbach's alphas 在 0.74 至 0.97 之间（PH42）和 0.73 至 0.87 之间（I.ROC12）。总分之间的皮尔逊相关性为 0.8，斯皮尔曼相关性为 0.77。PH42和I.ROC12都有助于定量测量积极的健康方面，这些方面可以用总分来概括。本研究发现的维度和相应的项目划分与原始对话工具的维度有所不同。建议进一步开展研究，重点关注 PH42 的项目缩减、I.ROC 的因子结构、构建有效性评估（在普通人群中）以及更深入的反应量表。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Applied Research in Quality of Life SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-

CiteScore

6.40

自引率

11.80%

发文量

期刊介绍： The aim of this journal is to publish conceptual, methodological and empirical papers dealing with quality-of-life studies in the applied areas of the natural and social sciences. As the official journal of the ISQOLS, it is designed to attract papers that have direct implications for, or impact on practical applications of research on the quality-of-life. We welcome papers crafted from interdisciplinary, inter-professional and international perspectives. This research should guide decision making in a variety of professions, industries, nonprofit, and government sectors, including healthcare, travel and tourism, marketing, corporate management, community planning, social work, public administration, and human resource management. The goal is to help decision makers apply performance measures and outcome assessment techniques based on concepts such as well-being, human satisfaction, human development, happiness, wellness and quality-of-life. The Editorial Review Board is divided into specific sections indicating the broad scope of practice covered by the journal. The section editors are distinguished scholars from many countries across the globe.