Introduction
Methods
Design
Instrument
-
3 items measured using categorical variable scales
-
5 items measured using 5-point Likert scales ranging from ‘daily (1) to never (5)’, ‘never (1) to always (5)’ and ‘very light (1) to very salty (5)’
-
3 items requiring participants to directly answer the number of meals being consumed at home and the percentage of food consumed at home vs away from home.
-
1 binary scale (yes/no) item.
Phase 1: Adaptation of the Determinants of Salt-Restriction Behaviour Questionnaire
Expert panel review for translation equivalence and content relevance
Translation equivalence evaluation and content validity
Phase 2: Psychometric testing of the revised Chinese and translated English Determinants of Salt-Restriction Behaviour Questionnaires
Participants and setting
Data analyses
Ethical considerations
Results
Phase 1 – Translation equivalence and content relevance
The adaptation of DSRBQ
-
nine demographic items; nine personal dietary practice items; four items about the salt-related health education/medical advice that the participant had received in part 1,
-
six salt-related health knowledge items in part 2, and
-
forty-five Likert scale items (part 3).
Original DSRBQ | Revised DSRBQ | Remarks | |
---|---|---|---|
Part 1 | A total of 28 items: • Demographic characteristics (n = 9), including age, gender, ethnicity, education, marital status, employment, income and health conditions • Personal dietary practice (n = 12): • 3 items measured using categorical variable scales • 5 items measured using 5–point Likert scales ranging from ‘daily (1) to never (5)’, ‘never (1) to always (5)’ and ‘very light (1) to very salty (5)’ • 3 items requiring participants to directly answer the number of meals being consumed at home and the percentage of food consumed at home vs away from home • 1 binary scale (yes/no) items • Salt–related health education/medical advice that the participant has received (n = 7), measured using a binary scale (yes/no) | A total of 22 items: • Demographic characteristics (n = 9), including age, gender, place of birth, education, marital status, employment, income and health conditions • Personal dietary practice (n = 9): • 3 items measured using categorical variable scales • 3 items measured using 5–point Likert scales ranging from ‘daily (1) to never (5)’, ‘never (1) to always (5)’ and ‘very light (1) to very salty (5)’ • 2 items requiring participants to directly answer the number of meals being consumed at home and the percentage of food consumed at home vs away from home • 1 binary scale (yes/no) items • Salt–related health education/medical advice that the participant has received (n = 4), measured using a binary scale (yes/no) | • 6 items (Items 8, 13,14, 22, 26 and 27) were removed from the questionnaire because: • Item 8 was not relevant to the Chinese Australian lifestyle (I–CVI = 0.50) • Items 13 and 14 were related to the cooking style. However, the practices vary according to the participants’ background. Chinese people from different parts of Asia may interpret the questions differently • Items 22, 26 and 27 (I–CVI = 0.67). The questions were not related to the salt reduction strategies in Australia • Item 3 was changed from ‘ethnic groups in China, eg. Han, Zhuang, Hui, etc.’ to the ‘place of birth’ • Item 6 – the weekly income scale was changed and aligned with the 2011 Census, Personal Income Ranges (ABS, 2016) • Item 11 – the words ‘Beijing local government’ was removed from the answer options |
Part 2 | • Salt–related health knowledge (n = 6) measured using categorical variable scales | • Salt–related health knowledge (n = 6) measured using categorical variable scales | • No change |
Part 3 | A total of 47 items forming six subscales: • Perceived threat (n = 5) • Knowledge/perceived susceptibility to and severity of the disease (n = 6) • Perceived benefits of action subscale (n = 3) • Perceived benefits of using a measuring spoon (n = 3) • Likelihood of following the recommended interventions (n = 10) • Perceived barriers (n = 20) | A total of 45 items forming six subscales: • Perceived threat (n = 5) • Knowledge/perceived susceptibility to and severity of the disease (n = 6) • Perceived benefits of action subscale (n = 3) • Perceived benefits of using a measuring spoon (n = 3) • Likelihood of following the recommended interventions (n = 10) • Perceived barriers (n = 18) | • Two Likert scale items (Items 28 and 29) were removed because they were related to the measuring spoon given by the local government in Beijing, China |
Phase 2
Characteristics of the participants
Characteristics | Total sample (T1) (n = 146), n (%) [English: n = 67, Chinese: n = 79] | Retest (T2) (n = 49), n (%) [English: n = 29, Chinese: n = 20] |
---|---|---|
Gender | ||
Male | 49 (33.6%) | 14 (28.6%) |
Female | 97 (66.4%) | 35 (71.4%) |
Age: mean (SD) | 35 (12.9) | 39 (16.8) |
Hypertension | ||
Diagnosed hypertension | 14 (9.5%) | 7 (14.3%) |
Normotension | 121 (82.3%) | 39 (79.6%) |
Unknown | 12 (8.2%) | 3 (6.1%) |
Marital status | ||
Married | 59 (40.4%) | 16 (32.7%) |
Single/separated/divorced | 87 (59.6%) | 33 (67.3%) |
Place of birth | ||
Mainland China | 45 (30.8%) | 13 (26.6%) |
Hong Kong | 58 (39.7%) | 20 (40.8%) |
Taiwan | 16 (11.0%) | 8 (16.3%) |
Other, e.g. Malaysia, Singapore | 27 (18.5%) | 8 (16.3%) |
Education level | ||
Primary | 2 (1.4%) | 1 (2.0%) |
Secondary | 19 (13.0%) | 6 (12.3%) |
Tertiary or university | 125 (85.6%) | 42 (85.7%) |
Occupation | ||
Unskilled | 28 (19.2%) | 11 (22.5%) |
Skilled | 31 (21.2%) | 7 (14.3%) |
Semi–professional/professional | 15 (10.3%) | 2 (4.1%) |
Student | 20 (13.7%) | 6 (12.2%) |
Self–employed | 11 (7.5%) | 5 (10.2%) |
Unemployed/retired | 41 (28.1%) | 18 (36.7%) |
Household income (per annum) | ||
< $20,800 | 11 (7.5%) | 6 (12.2%) |
$20,800–$41,599 | 17 (11.7%) | 7 (14.3%) |
$41,600–$64,999 | 32 (21.9%) | 11 (22.4%) |
$65,000–$103,999 | 31 (21.2%) | 9 (18.4%) |
> $104,000 | 52 (35.6%) | 14 (28.6%) |
No response | 3 (2.1%) | 2 (4.1%) |
Internal consistency and reliability
Question | Test | English version | Chinese version | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Part 1 | ||||
Q8a | Meals consumed at home: Weekdays–meals/day | Pearson Correlation | r = 0.111; p = 0.552 | r = 0.367; p = 0.101 |
Q8b | Meals consumed at home: Weekends–meals/day | Pearson Correlation | r = 0.352; p = 0.061 | r = 0.079; p = 0.740 |
Q9 | Taking antihypertensive drugs | McNemar | 1.000 | 0.625 |
Q10 | Using a measuring spoon at home | McNemar | 0.508 | 0.500 |
Q11a | Additional food seasoning–pickles | McNemar | 0.035 | 0.008 |
Q11b | Additional food seasoning–sauces | McNemar | 0.026 | 0.009 |
Q11c | Additional food seasoning–MSG/chicken essence | McNemar | 0.000 | 0.001 |
Q11d | Additional food seasoning–soy sauce | McNemar | 0.009 | 0.000 |
Q11e | Additional food seasoning–Nil | McNemar | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Q12 | Preference for a salty taste in food | Pearson Correlation | r = 0.275; p = 0.121 | r = –0.174; p = 0.450 |
Q13 | Amount of food consumed at home (%) | Pearson Correlation | r = 0.330; p = 0.070 | r = 0.138; p = 0.550 |
Q14 | How often uses a measuring spoon when cooking | Pearson Correlation | r = 0.004; p = 0.986 | r = –0.221; p = 0.349 |
Q15 | Deliberately limiting salt being added to cooking (Chinese version only) | Pearson Correlation | Not performed | r = –0.080; p = 0.739 |
Q16a | How do you add salt to cooking–use a spatula | McNemar | 0.143 | 1.000 |
Q16b | How do you add salt to cooking–cooking pot | McNemar | 0.035 | 0.754 |
Q16c | How do you add salt to cooking–tablespoon | McNemar | 0.007 | 0.508 |
Q16d | How do you add salt to cooking–measuring spoon | McNemar | 0.687 | 1.000 |
Q17a | Use of measuring spoon–work out the amount for each dish | McNemar | 0.625 | 1.000 |
Q17b | Use of measuring spoon–follow the experience | McNemar | 0.410 | 0.180 |
Q17c | Use of measuring spoon–follow the preferred taste | McNemar | 0.001 | 1.000 |
Q17d | Use of measuring spoon–never use a spoon | McNemar | 0.064 | 0.180 |
Q18 | Has relatives with hypertension | McNemar | 0.344 | 0.344 |
Q19 | Advised by a doctor to reduce salt intake | McNemar | 1.000 | 0.625 |
Q20 | Advised by family, friend and relatives to reduce salt intake | McNemar | 0.289 | 0.791 |
Q21 | Advertising on TV, magazines and internet regarding salt reduction | McNemar | 0.581 | 0.754 |
Part 2 | ||||
Q1 | The amount of salt intake recommended by the World Health Organization | McNemar | 0.267 | 0.500 |
Q2 | The long–term impact of high salt intake on health | McNemar | 1.000 | 0.581 |
Q3 | The diagnostic criteria for hypertension | McNemar | 1.000 | 0.388 |
Q4 | The causes of hypertension | McNemar | 0.625 | 1.000 |
Q5 | The prevention of hypertension | McNemar | 0.424 | 0.625 |
Q6 | The complications of poor hypertension control | McNemar | 0.581 | 0.687 |
Part 2 | Mean | Standard Deviation | Item–to–total correlation coefficient | Cronbach’s alpha if item is deleted | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Item | English version | Chinese version | English version | Chinese version | English version | Chinese version | English version | Chinese version |
Item 1 What is the maximum daily salt consumption for an adult recommended by the WHO? | 1.261 | 1.100 | 0.443 | 0.302 | 0.207 | –0.060 | 0.636 | 0.616 |
Item 2 A long–term high dietary salt intake can directly lead to… | 1.630 | 1.425 | 0.486 | 0.497 | 0.283 | 0.241 | 0.611 | 0.533 |
Item 3 What are the diagnostic criteria for high blood pressure? | 1.308 | 1.425 | 0.465 | 0.497 | 0.268 | 0.267 | 0.615 | 0.518 |
Item 4 What are the causes of high blood pressure? | 1.862 | 1.888 | 0.348 | 0.318 | 0.503 | 0.488 | 0.527 | 0.428 |
Item 5 How can you prevent high blood pressure? | 1.908 | 1.900 | 0.292 | 0.302 | 0.502 | 0.445 | 0.542 | 0.450 |
Item 6 What are the complications of poor blood pressure control? | 1.785 | 1.725 | 0.414 | 0.449 | 0.485 | 0.451 | 0.522 | 0.410 |
Part 3 | Cronbach’s alpha | ICCa | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
English version | Chinese version | English version | Chinese version | |||
T1 (n = 67) | T2 (n = 29) | T1 (n = 79) | T2 (n = 20) | |||
Overall scale | 0.816 | 0.786 | 0.692 | 0.829 | 0.820 | 0.688 |
1. Perceived threat subscale | 0.874 | 0.876 | 0.928 | 0.756 | 0.560 | 0.421 |
2. Knowledge/perceived susceptibility/ severity to the disease subscale | 0.828 | 0.866 | 0.829 | 0.899 | 0.816 | 0.681 |
3. Perceived benefits of action subscale | 0.874 | 0.835 | 0.916 | 0.923 | 0.558 | 0.511 |
4. Perceived benefits of using a measuring spoon subscale | 0.771 | 0.660 | 0.803 | 0.794 | 0.671 | 0.655 |
5. Likelihood of following the recommended interventions subscale | 0.850 | 0.869 | 0.817 | 0.886 | 0.798 | 0.818 |
6. Perceived barriers subscale | 0.783 | 0.896 | 0.765 | 0.657 | 0.762 | 0.652 |