Back

Measuring Autonomic Symptoms with the Body Perception Questionnaire Short Form (BPQ-SF): Factor Analysis, Derivation of U.S. Adult Normative Values, and Association with Sensor-Based Physiological Measures

Kolacz, J.; Chen, X.; Nix, E. J.; Roath, O. K.; Holmes, L. G.; Tokash, C.; Porges, S. W.; Lewis, G. F.

2022-04-28 psychiatry and clinical psychology
10.1101/2022.04.27.22274391 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveAutonomic regulation of organ and tissues may give rise to disruptions of typical functions. The Body Perception Questionnaire Short Form (BPQ-SF) includes items that were developed to assess autonomic symptoms in daily life. This pair of studies aimed to establish previously unexplored psychometric properties of the BPQ-SF, develop normative values for clinical and research use, and validate the self-reports with sensor-based measures. MethodsStudy 1 reports exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on BPQ-SF autonomic reactivity items from a large U.S. population-based online study (n = 2048). In study 2, BPQ-SF scores were examined for associations with heart period, respiratory sinus arrhythmia (RSA), and skin conductance (SC) during seated leg lifts in a community sample (n = 62). ResultsStudy 1 results supported a 2-factor supra- and sub-diaphragmatic autonomic symptom solution (CFA: RMSEA = .040, CFI = .99, TLI = .99), though a 1-factor solution also fit the data well (RMSEA = .080, CFI = .99, TLI = .99). In study 2, flexible HP responses to lifts and rests were demonstrated at all autonomic symptom levels. However, low self-reported autonomic symptoms were associated with flexible dynamic RSA and SC, moderate symptoms with prolonged SC responses during rest periods, and high symptoms with little systematic changes in RSA and SC during leg lifts. ConclusionResults support the validity of self-reports of autonomic symptoms in research and clinical applications, with higher symptoms likely indicating impairment in autonomic flexibility.

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.