具有健康教育领域专业能力的妇女自我评价积极健康(身体维度)的实证验证

D. Dobosz
{"title":"具有健康教育领域专业能力的妇女自我评价积极健康(身体维度)的实证验证","authors":"D. Dobosz","doi":"10.15561/18189172.2019.0203","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: to address a question whether reports of young women concerning their positive health are concordant with indices based on recommended methods of measuring health? Material: the study consist of fifteen, 23 years old female students of physiotherapy (height: QUOTE 15X\"> =164.3 ±4.55; weight: QUOTE 15X\"> = 60.7 ±6.76) who declared engagement in everyday or occasional physical activity. They completed The profile of the sense of positive health and survival abilities indices (SPHSA questionnaire). It includes 23 indices: 8 of somatic health (A), 4 of mental health (B), 3 of social health (C) and 8 of survival ability (D). The sense of intensity of particular indices (aspects A, B, C) is evaluated in the 1 to 5 scale where: 1 very low, 2 low, 3 average, 4 high, 5 very high. Additional index “0” (added to this five-point rating scale) is reserved to aspect D. Besides, SPHSA comprise 8 questions relating to subject’s earlier experiences associated with: safe falling, self-defence, martial arts, life-saving skills in the water, first aid, survival, uniformed services and scouting. Results: there is statistically significant correlation (r = 0.57; p<0.05) between reported and diagnosed average value of general index of somatic health of young women. Reported and diagnosed values of general index of somatic health are concordant in 5 women (33% of study group). The remaining 10 women either overestimate (n = 7) or underestimate (n = 3) their somatic health. Regardless of declared physical activity women significantly overestimated their diastolic blood pressure and underestimate their anaerobic capacity and flexibility: p<0.05 or p<0.01 (these misestimations, concerns indices having extreme values, both highest and lowest). Tendency is more evident in case of everyday active women. Conclusions: results of the experiment allow recommendation SPHSA as a useful tool to measure people’s sense of somatic health. Concurrently person’s self-evaluations can be easily verified because they concern such characteristics of the body which can be measured by quasi-objective methods (criterion validity).","PeriodicalId":19861,"journal":{"name":"Pedagogics, psychology, medical-biological problems of physical training and sports","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Empirical verification of self-rated positive health (somatic dimension) in women with professional competence in the field of health education\",\"authors\":\"D. Dobosz\",\"doi\":\"10.15561/18189172.2019.0203\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose: to address a question whether reports of young women concerning their positive health are concordant with indices based on recommended methods of measuring health? Material: the study consist of fifteen, 23 years old female students of physiotherapy (height: QUOTE 15X\\\"> =164.3 ±4.55; weight: QUOTE 15X\\\"> = 60.7 ±6.76) who declared engagement in everyday or occasional physical activity. They completed The profile of the sense of positive health and survival abilities indices (SPHSA questionnaire). It includes 23 indices: 8 of somatic health (A), 4 of mental health (B), 3 of social health (C) and 8 of survival ability (D). The sense of intensity of particular indices (aspects A, B, C) is evaluated in the 1 to 5 scale where: 1 very low, 2 low, 3 average, 4 high, 5 very high. Additional index “0” (added to this five-point rating scale) is reserved to aspect D. Besides, SPHSA comprise 8 questions relating to subject’s earlier experiences associated with: safe falling, self-defence, martial arts, life-saving skills in the water, first aid, survival, uniformed services and scouting. Results: there is statistically significant correlation (r = 0.57; p<0.05) between reported and diagnosed average value of general index of somatic health of young women. Reported and diagnosed values of general index of somatic health are concordant in 5 women (33% of study group). The remaining 10 women either overestimate (n = 7) or underestimate (n = 3) their somatic health. Regardless of declared physical activity women significantly overestimated their diastolic blood pressure and underestimate their anaerobic capacity and flexibility: p<0.05 or p<0.01 (these misestimations, concerns indices having extreme values, both highest and lowest). Tendency is more evident in case of everyday active women. Conclusions: results of the experiment allow recommendation SPHSA as a useful tool to measure people’s sense of somatic health. Concurrently person’s self-evaluations can be easily verified because they concern such characteristics of the body which can be measured by quasi-objective methods (criterion validity).\",\"PeriodicalId\":19861,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pedagogics, psychology, medical-biological problems of physical training and sports\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pedagogics, psychology, medical-biological problems of physical training and sports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15561/18189172.2019.0203\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pedagogics, psychology, medical-biological problems of physical training and sports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15561/18189172.2019.0203","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

目的:解决一个问题,即年轻妇女关于其积极健康状况的报告是否与基于推荐的健康测量方法的指数一致?材料:该研究由15名23岁的物理治疗女生组成(身高:QUOTE 15X“>=164.3±4.55;体重:QUOTE 15X”>=60.7±6.76),她们宣布参加日常或偶尔的体育活动。他们完成了积极健康感和生存能力指数的概况(SPHSA问卷)。它包括23项指标:身体健康(A)8项,心理健康(B)4项,社会健康(C)3项,生存能力(D)8项。特定指数(方面A、B、C)的强度感以1-5的量表进行评估,其中:1非常低,2低,3平均,4高,5非常高。附加指数“0”(添加到该五分评分表中)保留给D方面。此外,SPHSA包括8个与受试者早期经历相关的问题:安全坠落、自卫、武术、水中救生技能、急救、生存、制服服务和侦察。结果:青年女性躯体健康综合指数的报告平均值与诊断平均值之间存在统计学显著相关性(r=0.57;p<0.05)。5名女性(研究组的33%)的报告和诊断的身体健康综合指数值一致。其余10名女性要么高估(n=7),要么低估(n=3)她们的身体健康状况。无论宣布的体力活动如何,女性都显著高估了她们的舒张压,低估了她们的无氧能力和灵活性:p<0.05或p<0.01(这些错误估计涉及最高和最低的极值指数)。这种趋势在日常活跃的女性身上更为明显。结论:实验结果允许推荐SPHSA作为衡量人们身体健康感的有用工具。同时,人的自我评价可以很容易地得到验证,因为它们涉及身体的这些特征,这些特征可以用准客观的方法来衡量(标准有效性)。
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
Empirical verification of self-rated positive health (somatic dimension) in women with professional competence in the field of health education
Purpose: to address a question whether reports of young women concerning their positive health are concordant with indices based on recommended methods of measuring health? Material: the study consist of fifteen, 23 years old female students of physiotherapy (height: QUOTE 15X"> =164.3 ±4.55; weight: QUOTE 15X"> = 60.7 ±6.76) who declared engagement in everyday or occasional physical activity. They completed The profile of the sense of positive health and survival abilities indices (SPHSA questionnaire). It includes 23 indices: 8 of somatic health (A), 4 of mental health (B), 3 of social health (C) and 8 of survival ability (D). The sense of intensity of particular indices (aspects A, B, C) is evaluated in the 1 to 5 scale where: 1 very low, 2 low, 3 average, 4 high, 5 very high. Additional index “0” (added to this five-point rating scale) is reserved to aspect D. Besides, SPHSA comprise 8 questions relating to subject’s earlier experiences associated with: safe falling, self-defence, martial arts, life-saving skills in the water, first aid, survival, uniformed services and scouting. Results: there is statistically significant correlation (r = 0.57; p<0.05) between reported and diagnosed average value of general index of somatic health of young women. Reported and diagnosed values of general index of somatic health are concordant in 5 women (33% of study group). The remaining 10 women either overestimate (n = 7) or underestimate (n = 3) their somatic health. Regardless of declared physical activity women significantly overestimated their diastolic blood pressure and underestimate their anaerobic capacity and flexibility: p<0.05 or p<0.01 (these misestimations, concerns indices having extreme values, both highest and lowest). Tendency is more evident in case of everyday active women. Conclusions: results of the experiment allow recommendation SPHSA as a useful tool to measure people’s sense of somatic health. Concurrently person’s self-evaluations can be easily verified because they concern such characteristics of the body which can be measured by quasi-objective methods (criterion validity).
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
The effects of physical education on changes of basic motor skills of female students in the fifth grade of elementary school The effects of tow protocol cold water immersion on the post match recovery and physical performance in well-trained handball players Investigation of the effect of supramaximal eccentric contractions on muscle damage and recovery between the dominant and non-dominant arm Impact of coordination training on the development of speed among young judokas from 10 to 12 years old Identifying control structure of multi-joint coordination in dart throwing: the effect of distance constraint
×
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