Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties of the Italian version of the Body Perception Questionnaire.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
30
12
2019
accepted:
05
05
2021
entrez:
27
5
2021
pubmed:
28
5
2021
medline:
25
2
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The purpose of this study was to cross-culturally adapt the Body Perception Questionnaire Short Form (BPQ-SF) into Italian and to assess its psychometric properties in a sample of Italian subjects. A forward-backward method was used for translation. 493 adults were recruited for psychometric analysis. Structural validity was assessed with confirmatory factor analysis and a hypothesis testing approach. Internal consistency was assessed by Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega. Measurement invariance analysis was applied with an age-matched American sample. The single-factor structure fit the awareness subscale (RMSEA = .036, CFI = .983, TLI = .982). Autonomic reactivity (ANSR) was well-described by supra- and sub-diaphragmatic subscales (RMSEA = .041, CFI = .984, TLI = .982). All subscales were positively correlated (r range: .50-.56) and had good internal consistency (McDonald's Omega range: .86-.92, Cronbach's alpha range: .88-.91). Measurement invariance analysis for the Awareness model showed significant results (p<0.001) in each step (weak, strong and strict) whereas the ANSR showed significant results (p<0.001) only for the strong and strict steps. Our results support the Italian version of the BPQ as having consistent psychometric properties in comparison with other languages.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this study was to cross-culturally adapt the Body Perception Questionnaire Short Form (BPQ-SF) into Italian and to assess its psychometric properties in a sample of Italian subjects.
METHODS
A forward-backward method was used for translation. 493 adults were recruited for psychometric analysis. Structural validity was assessed with confirmatory factor analysis and a hypothesis testing approach. Internal consistency was assessed by Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega. Measurement invariance analysis was applied with an age-matched American sample.
RESULTS
The single-factor structure fit the awareness subscale (RMSEA = .036, CFI = .983, TLI = .982). Autonomic reactivity (ANSR) was well-described by supra- and sub-diaphragmatic subscales (RMSEA = .041, CFI = .984, TLI = .982). All subscales were positively correlated (r range: .50-.56) and had good internal consistency (McDonald's Omega range: .86-.92, Cronbach's alpha range: .88-.91). Measurement invariance analysis for the Awareness model showed significant results (p<0.001) in each step (weak, strong and strict) whereas the ANSR showed significant results (p<0.001) only for the strong and strict steps.
CONCLUSIONS
Our results support the Italian version of the BPQ as having consistent psychometric properties in comparison with other languages.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34043660
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0251838
pii: PONE-D-19-35072
pmc: PMC8158925
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0251838Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Scand J Caring Sci. 2007 Sep;21(3):291-6
pubmed: 17727540
Conscious Cogn. 2017 Feb;48:129-137
pubmed: 27866005
Brain Struct Funct. 2010 Jun;214(5-6):563-77
pubmed: 20512381
J Appl Physiol (1985). 1996 Aug;81(2):743-50
pubmed: 8872642
Front Psychol. 2020 Jun 30;11:1355
pubmed: 32714241
Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2018 Jun;27(2):e1596
pubmed: 29193423
Psychophysiology. 2009 Nov;46(6):1130-6
pubmed: 19602175
Physiother Theory Pract. 2010 Oct;26(7):439-46
pubmed: 20649495
Psychophysiology. 1995 Jul;32(4):301-18
pubmed: 7652107
Neuron. 2013 Feb 20;77(4):624-38
pubmed: 23439117
J Psychosom Res. 2008 Nov;65(5):417-24
pubmed: 18940371
J Clin Psychol. 2018 Apr;74(4):554-565
pubmed: 29076530
J Clin Epidemiol. 2010 Jul;63(7):737-45
pubmed: 20494804
Psychol Bull. 1990 Mar;107(2):238-46
pubmed: 2320703
Hum Neurobiol. 1982;1(4):231-4
pubmed: 6764468
Am J Cardiol. 2004 Feb 1;93(3):381-5
pubmed: 14759400
Multivariate Behav Res. 1990 Apr 1;25(2):173-80
pubmed: 26794479
Biol Psychol. 2015 Jan;104:65-74
pubmed: 25451381
J Hist Neurosci. 2013;22(3):277-91
pubmed: 23679224
Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2017 Feb;23:45-56
pubmed: 28081519
Behav Res Ther. 1997 Oct;35(10):901-10
pubmed: 9401131
J Psychosom Res. 2005 Jan;58(1):73-81
pubmed: 15771873
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2007 Jun;30(5):374-9
pubmed: 17574955
Exp Clin Transplant. 2019 Jan;17(Suppl 1):270-276
pubmed: 30777573
Dev Rev. 2016 Sep;41:71-90
pubmed: 27942093
J Psychosom Res. 2006 May;60(5):521-30
pubmed: 16650593
World J Gastroenterol. 2008 Aug 21;14(31):4889-96
pubmed: 18756596
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2009 Jan;10(1):59-70
pubmed: 19096369
Med Probl Perform Art. 2018 Jun;33(2):131-136
pubmed: 29868688
Trends Neurosci. 2009 Jan;32(1):56-67
pubmed: 18986715
J Clin Epidemiol. 2007 Jan;60(1):34-42
pubmed: 17161752
Front Psychol. 2014 Jun 06;5:508
pubmed: 24936191
Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2011 Apr 07;6:6
pubmed: 21473781
Trends Cogn Sci. 2009 Sep;13(9):372-80
pubmed: 19716751
Psychosom Med. 2002 Mar-Apr;64(2):353-7
pubmed: 11914453
Qual Life Res. 2013 Oct;22(8):1889-905
pubmed: 23288613
Psychon Bull Rev. 2019 Oct;26(5):1467-1471
pubmed: 31270764