Back

Validation of the Brazilian version of the Processes of Change Questionnaire in Weight Management in adults with overweight and obesity in Brazil

Rosa, A. R.; Carvalho, Q.; Rampelotto, P. Z.; Goularte, J. F.; Montezano, B. B.

2023-03-24 nutrition
10.1101/2023.03.20.23287450 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionThis study aimed to analyze the psychometric properties of the Brazilian version of the Processes of Change Questionnaire in Weight Management (P-Weight) questionnaire. MethodsA total of 656 adults participated in the study, including people in weight loss treatment and people from the general community. All participants responded to the Process of Change Questionnaire (P-Weight), the Stages of Change Questionnaire (S-Weight), and the Eating Attitudes Test (EAT-26), which assesses risk of eating disorder used as a measure of external validity. Socio-demographic variables were also investigated. ResultsThe 33-item P-weight questionnaire showed satisfactory psychometric properties with high internal consistency (Cronbachs alpha=0.959). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses revealed a 4-factor model similar to the original Spanish version of P-Weight with a slightly rearrangement of the items (KMO=0.92, df (528, n=328) =8,401.015; p<0.0001). We found significant associations between processes and stages of change (p<0.001) and a moderate correlation between the four subscales of P-weight and EAT-26 (p<0.001). Finally, the mean score of P-Weight were higher in clinical sample compared to the general community, suggesting the sensitivity to discriminate cases and controls (p<0.001). ConclusionThis study showed the validity and reliability of the Brazilian version of the P-Weight scale. Therefore, the P-Weight is readily available to help professionals to employ precision interventions to weight loss considering the patients motivational stage in combination with their individual use of the cognitive processes of change.

Published in Diabetology &amp; Metabolic Syndrome · not in our set (fewer than 10 published preprints to learn from) · training set

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.