评估饮食失调行为和态度:沙特阿拉伯阿拉伯语版饮食态度测试(EAT-26)的因子结构和测量不变性。

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q2 NUTRITION & DIETETICS Journal of Eating Disorders Pub Date : 2024-11-19 DOI:10.1186/s40337-024-01137-2
Mohsen M Alyami, Saeed A Al-Dossary
{"title":"评估饮食失调行为和态度:沙特阿拉伯阿拉伯语版饮食态度测试(EAT-26)的因子结构和测量不变性。","authors":"Mohsen M Alyami, Saeed A Al-Dossary","doi":"10.1186/s40337-024-01137-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The factorial structure of the Eating Attitudes Test (EAT-26) has been found to be inconsistent across studies and samples. This study aimed to resolve inconsistencies in the factorial structure of the Arabic version of the EAT-26 by identifying the best-fitting model and test its measurement invariance across sexes and BMI categories in a large non-clinical Saudi sample.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>1,734 Saudi adults (M<sub>age</sub> 26.88 and SD 9.13), predominantly female, completed an online survey. Several existing models were tested (e.g., original 26-item three-factor model, second order 26-item three-factor model, 20-item four-factor model, and 16-item four-factor model) using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Fit indices including the CFI, SRMR, and RMSEA were used to identify the best-fitting model for Arabic version of the EAT-26. Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis (MGCFA) was used to test measurement invariance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The original three-factor model and two other common models demonstrated poor fit (e.g., CFI = 0.727; SRMR = 0.0911; RMSEA = 0.085 [90% CI 0.082-0.087] for the original three-factor model). Instead, a 16-item, four-factor structure [(Self-Perceptions of Body Weight), (Dieting), (Awareness of Food Contents), and (Food Preoccupation)] showed acceptable fit ([CFI = 0.904; SRMR = 0.0554; RMSEA = 0.073 [90% CI 0.068- 0.077]). Internal consistency was good (α and ω = 0.88), and measurement invariance was supported across sex (male and female) and BMI categories (underweight, normal weight, overweight, and obese).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings underscore the need for culturally relevant validation of the EAT-26 among Arabic-speaking populations, as the revised factorial structure diverged from previously established models. Future research should further examine this revised 16-item, four-factor structure in clinical settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":48605,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eating Disorders","volume":"12 1","pages":"185"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11577874/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing disordered eating behaviours and attitudes: Factor structure and measurement invariance of the Arabic version of the eating attitudes test (EAT-26) in Saudi Arabia.\",\"authors\":\"Mohsen M Alyami, Saeed A Al-Dossary\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40337-024-01137-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The factorial structure of the Eating Attitudes Test (EAT-26) has been found to be inconsistent across studies and samples. This study aimed to resolve inconsistencies in the factorial structure of the Arabic version of the EAT-26 by identifying the best-fitting model and test its measurement invariance across sexes and BMI categories in a large non-clinical Saudi sample.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>1,734 Saudi adults (M<sub>age</sub> 26.88 and SD 9.13), predominantly female, completed an online survey. Several existing models were tested (e.g., original 26-item three-factor model, second order 26-item three-factor model, 20-item four-factor model, and 16-item four-factor model) using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Fit indices including the CFI, SRMR, and RMSEA were used to identify the best-fitting model for Arabic version of the EAT-26. Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis (MGCFA) was used to test measurement invariance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The original three-factor model and two other common models demonstrated poor fit (e.g., CFI = 0.727; SRMR = 0.0911; RMSEA = 0.085 [90% CI 0.082-0.087] for the original three-factor model). Instead, a 16-item, four-factor structure [(Self-Perceptions of Body Weight), (Dieting), (Awareness of Food Contents), and (Food Preoccupation)] showed acceptable fit ([CFI = 0.904; SRMR = 0.0554; RMSEA = 0.073 [90% CI 0.068- 0.077]). Internal consistency was good (α and ω = 0.88), and measurement invariance was supported across sex (male and female) and BMI categories (underweight, normal weight, overweight, and obese).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings underscore the need for culturally relevant validation of the EAT-26 among Arabic-speaking populations, as the revised factorial structure diverged from previously established models. Future research should further examine this revised 16-item, four-factor structure in clinical settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48605,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Eating Disorders\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"185\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11577874/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Eating Disorders\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40337-024-01137-2\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NUTRITION & DIETETICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Eating Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40337-024-01137-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:饮食态度测试(EAT-26)的因子结构在不同的研究和样本中并不一致。本研究旨在通过确定最佳拟合模型来解决阿拉伯语版 EAT-26 因子结构不一致的问题,并在大量非临床沙特样本中测试其跨性别和 BMI 类别的测量不变性。使用确证因子分析(CFA)对现有的几个模型(如原始的 26 项三因子模型、二阶 26 项三因子模型、20 项四因子模型和 16 项四因子模型)进行了测试。拟合指数包括 CFI、SRMR 和 RMSEA,用于确定阿拉伯语版 EAT-26 的最佳拟合模型。多组确认性因素分析(MGCFA)用于检验测量不变性:结果:原始的三因素模型和其他两个常见模型的拟合度较差(例如,原始三因素模型的 CFI = 0.727;SRMR = 0.0911;RMSEA = 0.085 [90% CI 0.082-0.087])。而16个项目的四因素结构[(对体重的自我认知)、(节食)、(对食物内容的认知)和(食物先入为主)]显示出可接受的拟合度([CFI = 0.904; SRMR = 0.0554; RMSEA = 0.073 [90% CI 0.068-0.077])。内部一致性良好(α 和 ω = 0.88),不同性别(男性和女性)和体重指数类别(体重不足、正常体重、超重和肥胖)的测量不变性均得到支持:这些发现强调了在讲阿拉伯语的人群中对 EAT-26 进行文化相关性验证的必要性,因为修订后的因子结构与之前建立的模型不同。未来的研究应在临床环境中进一步检验修订后的 16 项四因子结构。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Assessing disordered eating behaviours and attitudes: Factor structure and measurement invariance of the Arabic version of the eating attitudes test (EAT-26) in Saudi Arabia.

Background: The factorial structure of the Eating Attitudes Test (EAT-26) has been found to be inconsistent across studies and samples. This study aimed to resolve inconsistencies in the factorial structure of the Arabic version of the EAT-26 by identifying the best-fitting model and test its measurement invariance across sexes and BMI categories in a large non-clinical Saudi sample.

Methods: 1,734 Saudi adults (Mage 26.88 and SD 9.13), predominantly female, completed an online survey. Several existing models were tested (e.g., original 26-item three-factor model, second order 26-item three-factor model, 20-item four-factor model, and 16-item four-factor model) using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Fit indices including the CFI, SRMR, and RMSEA were used to identify the best-fitting model for Arabic version of the EAT-26. Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis (MGCFA) was used to test measurement invariance.

Results: The original three-factor model and two other common models demonstrated poor fit (e.g., CFI = 0.727; SRMR = 0.0911; RMSEA = 0.085 [90% CI 0.082-0.087] for the original three-factor model). Instead, a 16-item, four-factor structure [(Self-Perceptions of Body Weight), (Dieting), (Awareness of Food Contents), and (Food Preoccupation)] showed acceptable fit ([CFI = 0.904; SRMR = 0.0554; RMSEA = 0.073 [90% CI 0.068- 0.077]). Internal consistency was good (α and ω = 0.88), and measurement invariance was supported across sex (male and female) and BMI categories (underweight, normal weight, overweight, and obese).

Conclusions: These findings underscore the need for culturally relevant validation of the EAT-26 among Arabic-speaking populations, as the revised factorial structure diverged from previously established models. Future research should further examine this revised 16-item, four-factor structure in clinical settings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Eating Disorders
Journal of Eating Disorders Neuroscience-Behavioral Neuroscience
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
17.10%
发文量
161
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Eating Disorders is the first open access, peer-reviewed journal publishing leading research in the science and clinical practice of eating disorders. It disseminates research that provides answers to the important issues and key challenges in the field of eating disorders and to facilitate translation of evidence into practice. The journal publishes research on all aspects of eating disorders namely their epidemiology, nature, determinants, neurobiology, prevention, treatment and outcomes. The scope includes, but is not limited to anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, binge eating disorder and other eating disorders. Related areas such as important co-morbidities, obesity, body image, appetite, food and eating are also included. Articles about research methodology and assessment are welcomed where they advance the field of eating disorders.
期刊最新文献
From fixing to connecting: parents' experiences supporting adult children with eating disorders. Growing up in a larger body: youth- and parent-reported triggers for illness and barriers to recovery from anorexia nervosa. Correction: The role of impulsivity and binge eating in outpatients with overweight or obesity: an EEG temporal discounting study. Muscularity-oriented disordered eating: investigating body image concerns and the moderating role of emotion dysregulation in cyclists. Neurodivergence, intersectionality, and eating disorders: a lived experience-led narrative review.
×
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