| Research objectiveIn accordance with the change of medical model and based on the concepts of physical fitness and health-related physical fitness at home and abroad,this study puts forward the operational definition of "Healthy Fitness",and constructs the evaluation index system of healthy fitness from the multi-dimensional perspective of physical fitness,mental fitness and social fitness.The study combines healthy fitness with self-rated health,and develops the healthy fitness measurement scale version 1.0(HFMS V1.0)which is suitable for Chinese cultural background and values.HFMS V1.0 can reflect the real connotation and extension of healthy fitness comprehensively,concretely and accurately,and provides reliable and effective measurement tools and methods for the evaluation of national healthy fitness and the research of its influencing factors.Research method1.Literature analysisTaking "fitness","physical fitness","health-related physical fitness","mental fitness","social fitness","self-rated health" as key words,search in CNKI,CBM,PubMed,science direct and other Chinese and foreign databases.Collect,sort out and analyze related literature and reports,analyze the concept and connotation of healthy fitness,put forward its operational definition and select the healthy fitness evaluation index according to the operational definition,and form the primary index pool of the evaluation index system.2.Delphi methodDelphi method is developed by Rand Corporation of the United States and is a structured group communication method to collect experts’ opinions on a topic in the form of a questionnaire or a consultation form.In this study,experts from related disciplines such as health management,health evaluation,sports medicine,psychology,and clinical medicine were selected extensively to conduct one round of pre-consultation and two rounds of formal consultation on the construction of a healthy fitness evaluation index system.After each round of consultation,the coordination group will summarize and sort out the expert opinions,and send them back as reference materials to the experts participating in the next round of consultation.Repeatedly,a consistent and reliable evaluation result is obtained.3.Item analysis and screening methodsCritical ratio(CR),also known as extreme value method,is often used to analyze scale items.This method examines whether items have better discrimination ability by analyzing whether the difference in scores between high and low groups is statistically significant.If the difference between the high and low groups is statistically significant,the item can enter the next screening stage.In the item screening stage,in order to further select indicators with good effectiveness,practicality and sensitivity,this study uses 6 methods to further screen healthy fitness evaluation indicators,including the coefficient of variation method(CV method),the correlation coefficient method between indicators(index collinear analysis method),correlation coefficient method,factor analysis method,principal component analysis method and internal consistency coefficient method(Cronbach’s a coefficient method).4.Scale evaluation methodThe evaluation of the scale is mainly from the reliability,validity and other indicators.Reliability refers to the stability and reliability of the measurement results of the scale,and is generally reflected by split-half reliability,internal consistency reliability and retest reliability.In this study,Guttman’s half-reliability coefficient,Cronbach’α coefficient,and Spearman correlation coefficient were used to reflect the scale reliability.Validity refers to the deviation between the measured value of the scale and the real value of the subjects.It is mainly used to evaluate the accuracy and validity of the scale.Generally,it is evaluated by content validity,structure validity and differentiation validity.In this study,Delphi consultants’ opinions,the relevance of items,dimensions,and sub-scale scores,as well as exploratory factor analysis and demographic characteristics were used to evaluate the validity of the scale.Research results1.Operation definition and primary indicator poolAfter reviewing and demonstrating relevant literatures at home and abroad,based on the definition of physical fitness and health-related physical fitness,this study puts forward the operation definition of healthy fitness as:the optimal physiological,psychological and social adaptability of individuals in response to changes in internal and external environment.Combined with this operational definition and referring to the existing mature scales in the world,47 physiological fitness indexes,40 mental fitness indexes and 31 social fitness indexes were preliminarily selected in this study,and a total of 118 indexes constituted the original pool of the healthy fitness evaluation system.2.Delphi method for item screeningIn this study,24 experts from sports medicine,clinical medicine,psychological measurement,health evaluation and health management,scale preparation and other related fields were selected for formal consultation.In the three rounds of consultation,the recovery rate of expert consultation table is more than 90%,the authority coefficient(CR)of experts is more than 0.8,and the Kendall’s w of the third round of expert consultation is 0.281,the difference is statistically significant(P<0.05),indicating that the results of the expert consultation are reliable and accurate.According to the importance evaluation of the indicators by the experts,the indicators with the highest importance ranking shall be kept in priority.In combination with the expert’s opinions on supplement,modification and deletion,the indicators are modified and adjusted.For some indicators ranking first in importance,but the experts think that the sensitivity is not high,it is difficult to operate or there are many disputes,the indicators are modified or deleted through consultation of the coordination group.After many.times of screening and discussion,25 physiological fitness indexes,21 mental fitness indexes and 16 social fitness indexes were finally selected.In addition.4 overall evaluation items were included too.66 indexes in total form a test version of healthy fitness evaluation index system.3.Item analysis and re-screeningIn this study,the critical ratio(CR)method was used to analyze the items.The results showed that there was significant difference between the high and low scores of each item,suggesting that all items could better distinguish the healthy fitness status of different individuals,so all indicators were retained to enter the item selection stage.In the process of item screening,62 items of healthy fitness were screened by 6 methods,including coefficient of variation(CV method),correlation coefficient between indicators(index collinearity analysis method),factor analysis method and internal consistency coefficient method,and the evaluation indexes selected 4 or more times by 6 analysis methods were retained.After the combined application and screening of the above statistical methods,some indexes with poor differentiation,poor representativeness and repeated contents were deleted,and 38 indexes(including 14 physical fitness indexes,11 mental fitness indexes,9 social fitness indexes and 4 total evaluation items)were finally selected,and the Healthy Fitness Measurement Scale V1.0 was initially developed.4.Evaluation of Healthy Fitness Measurement Scale V1.0The reliability of the HFMS V1.0 is evaluated by three indexes:half reliability,internal consistency reliability and retest reliability.According to the analysis,Guttman half reliability coefficients of the whole population,urban residents,college students and civil servants are all greater than 0.7,Cronbach’α coefficients of PF,MF,SF and HFMS V1.0 are all above 0.8.The Spearman correlation coefficient between the first test and the retest of the total scale score is 0.826.Above all indicate that HFMS V1.0 has good split-half reliability,internal consistency reliability and retest reliability.The validity of the HFMS V1.0 is mainly evaluated by four indexes:content validity,structure validity,internal validity and discrimination validity.After Delphi expert consultation,the original item pool can effectively guarantee the content validity of the scale.According to the structural validity analysis,the correlation coefficients between each item and its dimension scores,and between each dimension and its sub-scale scores are all greater than 0.5,and factor analysis has extracted 10 factors with characteristic roots greater than 1.The contribution rate of each factor is between 3.474%-9.485%,and the cumulative contribution rate of square deviation is 62.71%.After rotation,each factor has a good explanation indicating that it is consistent with the original theoretical idea and the scale structure has good validity.Taking 4 overall evaluation items as internal benchmarks,the results show that the correlation coefficients of the physical,mental,and social overall evaluation items and their corresponding sub-scale scores are all greater than 0.5,indicating that there is a strong correlation within HFMS V1.0,and the validity of the internal criterion was good.Comparing the differences in HFMS V1.0 scores of different characteristics of the population,it is found that the differences in HFMS V1.0 scores of different genders,ages,education levels and other populations are significant,indicating that the scale can accurately measure the helathy fitness of individuals with different characteristics,and had good discrimination effect.ConclusionBased on China’s national conditions and cultural background,this study uses Delphi method to construct a universal healthy fitness measurement scale which is suitable for different populations in China.The original item pool was consulted by Delphi experts,and the analysis results showed that the enthusiasm coefficient,authority coefficient and consistency coefficient of experts were good,which ensured the validity of items in the scale.At the same time,this study uses Delphi expert consultation results to compile a questionnaire,conduct field surveys,and jointly screen the items again using 6 statistical methods to ensure the representativeness,rationality and sensitivity of the selected items.The test and analysis of HFMS V1.0 in different populations indicate that the scale has good reliability and validity.The design of the scale has reached the initial theoretical conception.It reflects the real connotation and extension of healthy fitness comprehensively,concretely and accurately,and provides scientific tools and methods for the measurement of individual healthy fitness.However,due to the limitation of time and funds,the evaluation criteria and influencing factors of the scale have not been studied.In the following research,it is proposed to design a questionnaire and conduct epidemiological surveys of the healthy fitness status of different populations.It is proposed to understand the healthy fitness status of different populations,construct their evaluation standards,and find out the influencing factors so as to provide reference basis and methodological support for relevant departments to formulate promotion programs for the healthy fitness of different populations and improve their fitness level. |
