National School Health Survey: Methodological aspects changes and comparability with the Global School-based Student Health Survey.

Alan Cristian Marinho Ferreira, Alanna Gomes da Silva, Évelin Angélica Herculano de Morais, Deborah Carvalho Malta
{"title":"National School Health Survey: Methodological aspects changes and comparability with the Global School-based Student Health Survey.","authors":"Alan Cristian Marinho Ferreira, Alanna Gomes da Silva, Évelin Angélica Herculano de Morais, Deborah Carvalho Malta","doi":"10.1590/1980-549720240053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To analyze the changes in the methodological aspects of the National Survey of School Health (PeNSE) and its comparability with the Global School-based Student Health Survey (GSHS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This evaluative study that utilized the PeNSE questionnaires from 2009, 2012, 2015, and 2019, and the GSHS questionnaires from 2013-2017 e 2018-2020. The variables analyzed included the sample size, representativeness and geographic stratification of PeNSE, the number of questions in PeNSE, the percentage similarity of the PeNSE 2019 relative to the 2015, and its comparability with GSHS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Over the four editions of PeNSE, the sample size increased (from 63,411 in 2009 to 125,123 in 2019). There were changes in educational levels (exclusion of the 6th grade and inclusion of the 7th and 8th grades of primary and secondary education), geographic stratification (expanded to large regions and federation units), and the number of questions increased by 46%. Regarding the similarity between the 2015 and 2019 editions, 48 questions were added, 35 were excluded, and 4 were changed. In 2019, PeNSE presented 11 modules that were partially comparable and 3 that were potentially not to those of 2015. The PeNSE 2015 edition was more similar to the GSHS, with 10 comparable modules, whereas in 2019, this number was reduced to five.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Since its creation, PeNSE has undergone several changes, including increased sample representativeness and number of questions across editions. However, changes to the questionnaires must be analyzed with caution, as they may compromise comparability with previous editions and international surveys.</p>","PeriodicalId":74697,"journal":{"name":"Revista brasileira de epidemiologia = Brazilian journal of epidemiology","volume":"27 ","pages":"e240053"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11654285/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista brasileira de epidemiologia = Brazilian journal of epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-549720240053","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To analyze the changes in the methodological aspects of the National Survey of School Health (PeNSE) and its comparability with the Global School-based Student Health Survey (GSHS).

Methods: This evaluative study that utilized the PeNSE questionnaires from 2009, 2012, 2015, and 2019, and the GSHS questionnaires from 2013-2017 e 2018-2020. The variables analyzed included the sample size, representativeness and geographic stratification of PeNSE, the number of questions in PeNSE, the percentage similarity of the PeNSE 2019 relative to the 2015, and its comparability with GSHS.

Results: Over the four editions of PeNSE, the sample size increased (from 63,411 in 2009 to 125,123 in 2019). There were changes in educational levels (exclusion of the 6th grade and inclusion of the 7th and 8th grades of primary and secondary education), geographic stratification (expanded to large regions and federation units), and the number of questions increased by 46%. Regarding the similarity between the 2015 and 2019 editions, 48 questions were added, 35 were excluded, and 4 were changed. In 2019, PeNSE presented 11 modules that were partially comparable and 3 that were potentially not to those of 2015. The PeNSE 2015 edition was more similar to the GSHS, with 10 comparable modules, whereas in 2019, this number was reduced to five.

Conclusion: Since its creation, PeNSE has undergone several changes, including increased sample representativeness and number of questions across editions. However, changes to the questionnaires must be analyzed with caution, as they may compromise comparability with previous editions and international surveys.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
全国学校健康调查:方法方面的变化以及与全球学校学生健康调查的可比性。
目的分析全国学校健康调查(PeNSE)在方法论方面的变化及其与全球学校学生健康调查(GSHS)的可比性:本评估研究使用了 2009 年、2012 年、2015 年和 2019 年的 PeNSE 问卷,以及 2013-2017 年和 2018-2020 年的 GSHS 问卷。分析的变量包括PeNSE的样本量、代表性和地域分层,PeNSE的问题数量,PeNSE 2019相对于2015的相似度百分比,以及与GSHS的可比性:在 PeNSE 的四个版本中,样本数量有所增加(从 2009 年的 63 411 个增加到 2019 年的 125 123 个)。教育水平发生了变化(剔除了小学六年级,纳入了中小学七、八年级),地理分层(扩大到大区和联邦单位),问题数量增加了 46%。关于 2015 年版和 2019 年版之间的相似性,增加了 48 道题,排除了 35 道题,更改了 4 道题。2019 年,PeNSE 提出了 11 个与 2015 年部分相似的模块和 3 个可能不相似的模块。PeNSE 2015 年版与 GSHS 更为相似,有 10 个可比模块,而在 2019 年,这一数字减少到 5 个:自创建以来,PeNSE经历了多次变革,包括提高样本代表性和增加各版本的问题数量。然而,必须谨慎分析问卷的变化,因为这些变化可能会影响与以往版本和国际调查的可比性。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Challenges and lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic for Health Surveillance in Brazil: reflections on technologies, models, and system organization. Effect of primary health care on the association between multimorbidity and emergency service utilization: National Health Survey, 2019. Chronic noncommunicable diseases and absenteeism from work: National Survey of Health, 2019. Heterogeneity in the consumption of fresh and ultra-processed foods by the Brazilian population ≥10 years of age. MonitoraSB: an innovation for monitoring and strengthening oral health in primary health care in Brazil.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1