The measurement properties of existing lifestyle assessment tools are suboptimal: a systematic review

Journal of Public Health - Trang 1-16 - 2023
Qi Wang1,2, Yong Wang3, Xinling Xie4, Zhi Wang4, Yafei Liu5, Bingwei Guo5, Lei Feng5, Elminur Kibir5, Guowu Ding5, Min Yin6, Long Ge1,5,7
1Evidence-Based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
2Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, China
3The First School of Clinical Medicine, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
4The Second School of Clinical Medicine, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
5Department of Social Medicine and Health Management, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
6The Second Physical Examination Center of The First Hospital, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
7Key Laboratory of Evidence Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, China

Tóm tắt

The current status of lifestyle assessment tools is still unclear. We aim to systematically identify those health lifestyle assessment tools, and synthesize and appraise studies on measurement properties. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CBM, CNKI, VIP, and WANFANG were searched. Two reviewers independently evaluated the quality of methodological and measurement properties according to the COSMIN risk of bias checklist and quality criteria. The modified version of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development of Evaluation (GRADE) was used to classify the grade of evidence and form the final recommendation. We identified 38 lifestyle assessment tools. Nine tools were adapted based on health-promoting lifestyle profile (HPLP) or HPLP-II. The reported measurement properties being considered “Sufficient ( +)” included: retest reliability (n = 10, 71.43%), internal consistency (n = 13, 52.00%), content validity (n = 1, 4.00%), criterion validity (n = 1, 16.67%), and construct validity (n = 19, 79.17%). HPLQ, HLQS, and LI-D Scale were assessed as Class A recommendations. The reporting of measurement properties results was incomplete. HPLQ, HLQS and LI-D Scale were recommended as grade A. HPLP-II was the most widely applied lifestyle assessment tool, which could be recommended temporarily after comprehensive consideration and weighing all aspects.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Aoshima T, Tanaka Y, Shibata S et al (2002) Development of a health guidance support system for lifestyle improvement. Committee of Health Evaluation Support System Council of Japan AMHTS Institutions. Methods Inf Med 41(3):209–12 Aynaci G, Akdemir O (2018) The relationship between lifestyle, health promotion lifestyle profile II and high blood pressure in university students. Open Access Maced J Med Sci 6(9):1756–1761. https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2018.314 Biswas A, Oh PI, Faulkner GE et al (2015) Sedentary time and its association with risk for disease incidence, mortality, and hospitalization in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 162(2):123–132. https://doi.org/10.7326/m14-1651 Cao W, Guo Y, Ping W et al (2016) Development and psychometric tests of a Chinese version of the HPLP-II Scales. Chin J Dis Control Prevent 20(03):286–289. https://doi.org/10.16462/j.cnki.zhjbkz.2016.03.018 Chan WS, Levsen MP, McCrae CS (2018) A meta-analysis of associations between obesity and insomnia diagnosis and symptoms. Sleep Med Rev 40:170–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smrv.2017.12.004 Chen C, Peng Y, Weng H et al (2013) Development and preliminary testing of a brief screening measure of healthy lifestyle for diabetes patients. Int J Nurs Stud 50(1):90–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2012.09.001 Choi S, Feinberg RA (2021) The LOHAS (Lifestyle of Health and Sustainability) scale development and validation. Sustainability 13(4):17. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041598 Christ A, Lauterbach M, Latz E (2019) Western diet and the immune system: an inflammatory connection. Immunity 51(5):794–811. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2019.09.020 Darviri C, Alexopoulos EC, Artemiadis AK et al (2014) The Healthy Lifestyle and Personal Control Questionnaire (HLPCQ): a novel tool for assessing self-empowerment through a constellation of daily activities. BMC Public Health 14:995. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-995 Ding F, Yang Y, Li L (2018) Development of health promotion lifestyle scale for cervical spondylosis and test of its reliability and validity. Modern Nurse 25(04):72–73 Dong J (2014) Study on knowledge, attitude and behavior scale of lifestyle intervention in diabetes high risk population. Master, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention. CNKI Du C (2019) Study on lifestyle evaluation systems for the health of Chinese elderly. Int J Environ Res Public Health 16(2):284. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16020284 Erci B (2012) The effectiveness of the Omaha System intervention on the women’s health promotion lifestyle profile and quality of life. J Adv Nurs 68(4):898–907. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2011.05794.x Feng Y (2013) The study of the preIiminary constitution of a Healthy Lifestyle Quest ionnair (HLQ) based on Chinese medicine theory. Doctor, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, CNKI Fu MQ (2006) TThe current situation and countermeasure study of the urban residents’ lifestyle and physical fitness in Chongqing. Doctor, Southwest University. CNKI Goodyear-Smith F, Arroll B, Sullivan S et al (2004) Lifestyle screening: development of an acceptable multi-item general practice tool. N Z Med J 117(1205):U1146 Goodyear-Smith F, Coupe NM, Arroll B et al (2008) Case finding of lifestyle and mental health disorders in primary care: validation of the “CHAT” tool. Br J Gen Pract 58(546):26–31. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp08X263785 Kim S, Popkin BM, Siega-Riz AM et al (2004) A cross-national comparison of lifestyle between China and the United States, using a comprehensive cross-national measurement tool of the healthfulness of lifestyles: the Lifestyle Index. Prev Med 38(2):160–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2003.09.028 Li S, Bu Y, Gao J et al (2010) Theoretical and empirical research on evaluation system of healthy lifestyles. J Shanghai Univ Sport 34(02):28–33. https://doi.org/10.16099/j.cnki.jsus.2010.02.008 Lo A, Hsieh KY, Lu WC et al (2021) Development and validation of the Lo’s Healthy and Happy Lifestyle Scale (LHHLS): the resilience in general population facing COVID-19 in Taiwan. Int J Soc Psychiatry 67(5):532–539. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020764020960771 Lopez-Fontana I, Perrot A, Krueger KR et al (2020) A global lifestyle assessment: psychometric properties of the General Lifestyle Questionnaire. Psychol Fr 65(4):311–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psfr.2019.06.004 Ma Y, Shen J, Wang G (2014) The healthy life style evaluative system construction of patients with chronic diseases. Med Soc 27(10):5–7,22. https://doi.org/10.13723/j.yxysh.2014.10.002 Mackie PC, Jessen EC, Jarvis SN (1998) The lifestyle assessment questionnaire: an instrument to measure the impact of disability on the lives of children with cerebral palsy and their families. Child Care Health Dev 24(6):473–486. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2214.1998.00083.x McHorney CA, Ware JE Jr, Raczek AE (1993) The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care 31(3):247–63. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-199303000-00006 Melnyk BM, Kelly S, Tan A (2021) Psychometric properties of the healthy lifestyle beliefs scale for adolescents. J Pediatr Health Care 35(3):285–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedhc.2020.11.002 Minkler M (1989) Health education, health promotion and the open society: an historical perspective. Health Educ Q 16(1):17–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/109019818901600105 Mokkink LB, de Vet HCW, Prinsen CAC et al (2018) COSMIN risk of bias checklist for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures. Qual Life Res 27(5):1171–1179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1765-4 Mostofsky E, Chahal HS, Mukamal KJ et al (2016) Alcohol and immediate risk of cardiovascular events: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis. Circulation 133(10):979–987. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.115.019743 Nurzulaikha A, Kueh YC, Kuan G et al (2021) Development and validation of the Health Promoting Behaviour for Bloating (HPB-Bloat) scale. PeerJ 9:e11444. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.11444 Ornish D, Magbanua MJ, Weidner G et al (2008) Changes in prostate gene expression in men undergoing an intensive nutrition and lifestyle intervention. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105(24):8369–8374. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0803080105 Pan A, Wang YL, Talaei M et al (2015) Relation of smoking with total mortality and cardiovascular events among patients with diabetes mellitus a meta-analysis and systematic review. Circulation 132(19):1795–1804. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.115.017926 Qian Z, Liu Y (2013) Preliminary development of life style scale for College students and test of its reliability and validity. J Huaiyin Teach Coll (Nat Sci Ed) 12(01):66–70. https://doi.org/10.16119/j.cnki.issn1671-6876.2013.01.008 Razieh B, Shahboulaghi FM, Montazeri A (2020) Development and psychometric evaluation of the healthy lifestyle questionnaire for elderly (heal). Health Qual Life Outcomes 18(1):277. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-020-01529-3 Reis F, Sá-Moura B, Guardado D et al (2019) Development of a healthy lifestyle assessment toolkit for the general public. Front Med (Lausanne) 6:134. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2019.00134 Salvador-Carulla L, Walsh CO, Alonso F et al (2012) eVITAL: a preliminary taxonomy and electronic toolkit of health-related habits and lifestyle. ScientificWorldJournal 2012:379752. https://doi.org/10.1100/2012/379752 Shi Z (2010) Healthy life style evaluative system of undergraduate. J TUS 25(04):363–366. https://doi.org/10.13297/j.cnki.issn1005-0000.2010.04.002 Teng HL, Yen M, Fetzer S (2010) Health promotion lifestyle profile-II: Chinese version short form. J Adv Nurs 66(8):1864–1873. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2010.05353.x Terwee CB, Prinsen CAC, Chiarotto A et al (2018) COSMIN methodology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: a Delphi study. Qual Life Res 27(5):1159–1170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1829-0 Wang D (2009) Development and Preliminary Application of a Healthy Lifestyle Questionnaire(HLQ). Doctor, Southern Medical University. CNKI Wang J, Lee CM, Chang CF et al (2015) The development and psychometric testing of the geriatric health promotion scale. J Nurs Res 23(1):56–64. https://doi.org/10.1097/jnr.0000000000000077 Wang ML, Lemon SC, Welch G et al (2013) Development and validation of the Lifestyle Self-Efficacy Scale for Latinos with Diabetes (LSESLD). Ethn Dis 23(4):428–435 West F, Sanders MR (2009) The Lifestyle Behaviour Checklist: a measure of weight-related problem behaviour in obese children. Int J Pediatr Obes 4(4):266–273. https://doi.org/10.3109/17477160902811199 Wilson DMC, Ciliska D (1984) Lifestyle assessment-development and use of the fantastic checklist. Can Fam Physician 30(JUL):1527–1532 Yao G, Chung C, Yu C, Wang J (2002) Development and verification of validity and reliability of the WHOQOL-BREF Taiwan version. J Formos Med Assoc 101(5):342–351 Zhang L, Wang C, Liu J (2018) Reliability and validity evaluation of the health promotion lifestyle scale for peritoneal dialysis patients. Chin J Blood Purif 17(10):713–716 Zhang N (2017) Construction of evaluation system for healthy life style of chinese adults. J Anhui Normal Univ (Nat Sci) 40(06):605–612. https://doi.org/10.14182/J.cnki.1001-2443.2017.06.016 Zhang S, Ta M, Niu W (2019) Screening evaluation indexes of healthy lifestyle of urban adults by Delphi method. Chin J Health Educ 35(03):199–202, 250. https://doi.org/10.16168/j.cnki.issn.1002-9982.2019.03.002 Zhang X, Wan L, Huang Y, Su Y, Liu C, Gao l (2011) The relationship between health behavior and quality of life after stroke. Chin Nurs Res 25(06):482–484 Zhu JC, Sheng JM, Lu J et al (2021) Research progress on healthy lifestyle assessment tools. Chin J Health Manage 15(06):606–610. https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn115624-20210406-00180