Catalogo Articoli (Spogli Riviste)

OPAC HELP

Titolo:
COMPARISON OF THE TRADITIONAL PAPER VISUAL ANALOG SCALE QUESTIONNAIREWITH AN APPLE-NEWTON ELECTRONIC APPETITE RATING SYSTEM (EARS) IN FREE-LIVING SUBJECTS FEEDING AD-LIBITUM
Autore:
STRATTON RJ; STUBBS RJ; HUGHES D; KING N; BLUNDELL JE; ELIA M;
Indirizzi:
MRC,DUNN CLIN NUTR CTR,HILLS RD CAMBRIDGE CB2 2DH ENGLAND MRC,DUNN CLIN NUTR CTR CAMBRIDGE CB2 2DH ENGLAND ROWETT RES INST BUCKSBURN AB2 9SB ABERDEEN SCOTLAND UNIV LEEDS,DEPT PSYCHOL LEEDS LS2 9JT W YORKSHIRE ENGLAND
Titolo Testata:
European journal of clinical nutrition
fascicolo: 10, volume: 52, anno: 1998,
pagine: 737 - 741
SICI:
0954-3007(1998)52:10<737:COTTPV>2.0.ZU;2-I
Fonte:
ISI
Lingua:
ENG
Soggetto:
QUALITY; LIFE; HUNGER; CANCER; PAIN;
Keywords:
HUMAN; APPETITE; HUNGER; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE;
Tipo documento:
Article
Natura:
Periodico
Settore Disciplinare:
Science Citation Index Expanded
Citazioni:
17
Recensione:
Indirizzi per estratti:
Citazione:
R.J. Stratton et al., "COMPARISON OF THE TRADITIONAL PAPER VISUAL ANALOG SCALE QUESTIONNAIREWITH AN APPLE-NEWTON ELECTRONIC APPETITE RATING SYSTEM (EARS) IN FREE-LIVING SUBJECTS FEEDING AD-LIBITUM", European journal of clinical nutrition, 52(10), 1998, pp. 737-741

Abstract

Objective: Assessing the value of a newly developed electronic visualanalogue scale questionnaire (Apple Newton Message Pad) with the traditional paper method for appetite rating. Design: In a random, crossover design, subjects completed both electronic and paper questionnairesto compare results obtained by the two methods; individual methods were completed consecutively to assess test-retest reliability; preference was established using a questionnaire. Setting/Subjects: Healthy, free-living adults were studied for comparison of methods (n=12), test-retest reliability (n = 8) and preference (n = 13). Intervention: Visual analogue scales were completed each waking hour to assess appetite. Preference was assessed after both methods were completed. Results: There was no significant difference in the hourly results obtained by the paper and electronic methods for 'desire to eat', 'how much can youeat now', 'urge to eat' and 'preoccupation with thoughts of food'. Small differences in 'hunger' and 'fullness' ratings were noted (similarto 5% mean difference between methods, P < 0.05), but patterns of change and sensitivity for these and all other parameters remained similar for both methods across the visual analogue scale. Test-retest reliability demonstrated was similar for both methods. Seven (54%) subjectspreferred to use the paper questionnaire, five (38%) the electronic method and one (8%) had no preference. Conclusions: The electronic Apple Newton questionnaire is as sensitive and reliable as the paper method, has the advantage that it automatically records the time of data acquisition and data collection and processing are more efficient for the researcher. The two methods should not be used interchangeably.

ASDD Area Sistemi Dipartimentali e Documentali, Università di Bologna, Catalogo delle riviste ed altri periodici
Documento generato il 14/07/20 alle ore 13:21:10