Assessment of nutrition and physical activity environments in family child care homes: modification and psychometric testing of the Environment and Policy Assessment and Observation.
Assessment of nutrition and physical activity environments in family child care homes: modification and psychometric testing of the Environment and Policy Assessment and Observation.
复制标题
对家庭托儿所中营养和体育活动环境的评估：环境以及政策评估和观察的修改和心理测试。
DOI：
10.1186/s12889-017-4686-9
复制
发表时间：
2017-08-29
影响因子：
4.5
通讯作者：
Ward DS
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Vaughn AE;Mazzucca S;Burney R;Østbye T;Benjamin Neelon SE;Tovar A;Ward DS
早期护理和教育环境在塑造幼儿的营养和体育活动习惯方面发挥着重要作用。越来越多的研究关注集中在家庭托儿所(FCCH)。然而，现有的儿童保育营养和体力活动环境的衡量标准是有限的，因为它们是为以中心为基础的计划而创建的，并且需要对涉及FCCH的研究进行修改。本文介绍了环境与政策评估和观察(EPAO)的修改，以便在FCCH中使用。EPAO经历了一次彻底的修改过程，其中纳入了数据收集工具的最新格式、对新出现的最佳做法的评估、针对FCCH环境的量身定做，以及创建新的评分标准。新仪器是作为一个更大的随机对照试验的一部分实施的。为了评估评价者之间的可靠性，由两个数据收集者独立地进行了61个不同天的观察。为了评估结构效度，研究了EPAO得分与儿童膳食摄入量(健康饮食指数(HEI)得分)和体力活动(加速计测量的中等到剧烈体力活动每小时分钟数，MVPA)之间的关系。修改后的EPAO评估了38项营养和27项体力活动最佳做法，这些最佳做法可归结为7项与营养有关的分项和10项与体力活动相关的环境分项分数，以及总体营养和整体体力活动分数。数据收集者之间总体上达成了良好的一致意见(ICC)(0.60)。喂养实践、体力活动教育和专业发展的可靠性略低(ICC=0.56和0.22)。儿童HEI与总体营养评分(r=0.23)、提供的食物(r=0.28)、提供的饮料(r=0.15)、营养教育和专业发展(r=0.21)、营养政策(r=0.18)显著相关。儿童MVPA与总的活动时间(r=0.18)和户外游戏时间(r=0.20)显著相关。儿童MVPA与屏幕时间(−0.16)和屏幕时间做法(r=−0.21)之间也存在意想不到的负相关。FCCH仪器的EPAO对于从事这一独特类型的欧洲经委会设置的研究人员来说是一个有用的工具。它经过了严格的开发和测试，似乎具有良好的心理测量特性。NCT01814215,2013年3月15日。本文的在线版本(doi：10.1186/s12889-0174686-9)包含补充材料，授权用户可以使用。
Early care and education (ECE) settings play an important role in shaping the nutrition and physical activity habits of young children. Increasing research attention is being directed toward family child care homes (FCCHs) specifically. However, existing measures of child care nutrition and physical activity environments are limited in that they have been created for use with center-based programs and require modification for studies involving FCCHs. This paper describes the modification of the Environment and Policy Assessment and Observation (EPAO) for use in FCCHs. The EPAO underwent a through modification process that incorporated an updated format for the data collection instrument, assessment of emerging best practices, tailoring to the FCCH environment, and creation of a new scoring rubric. The new instrument was implemented as part of a larger randomized control trial. To assess inter-rater reliability, observations on 61 different days were performed independently by two data collectors. To assess construct validity, associations between EPAO scores and measures of children’s dietary intake (Healthy Eating Index (HEI) score) and physical activity (accelerometer-measured minutes per hour of moderate to vigorous physical activity, MVPA) were examined. The modified EPAO assesses 38 nutrition and 27 physical activity best practices, which can be summarized into 7 nutrition-related and 10 physical activity-related environmental sub- scores as well as overall nutrition and overall physical activity scores. There was generally good agreement between data collectors (ICC > 0.60). Reliability was slightly lower for feeding practices and physical activity education and professional development (ICC = 0.56 and 0.22, respectively). Child HEI was significantly correlated with the overall nutrition score (r = 0.23), foods provided (r = 0.28), beverages provided (r = 0.15), nutrition education and professional development (r = 0.21), and nutrition policy (r = 0.18). Child MVPA was significantly associated with overall time provided for activity (r = 0.18) and outdoor playtime (r = 0.20). There was also an unexpected negative association between child MVPA and screen time (−0.16) and screen time practices (r = −0.21). The EPAO for the FCCH instrument is a useful tool for researchers working with this unique type of ECE setting. It has undergone rigorous development and testing and appears to have good psychometric properties. NCT01814215, March 15, 2013. The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-017-4686-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
5.5
作者：
Lyn R;Maalouf J;Evers S;Davis J;Griffin M
通讯作者：
Griffin M
影响因子：
4.9
作者：
Neelon, S. E. Benjamin;Andersen, C. Schou;Morgen, C. Schmidt;Kamper-Jorgensen, M.;Oken, E.;Gillman, M. W.;Sorensen, T. I. A.
通讯作者：
Sorensen, T. I. A.
影响因子：
2.2
作者：
Ostbye, Truls;Mann, Courtney M.;Ward, Dianne S.
通讯作者：
Ward, Dianne S.
影响因子：
3.4
作者：
Evenson, Kelly R.;Catellier, Diane J.;McMurray, Robert G.
通讯作者：
McMurray, Robert G.
影响因子：
--
作者：
Monsivais, Pablo;Kirkpatrick, Shannon;Johnson, Donna B.
通讯作者：
Johnson, Donna B.