4.7 Article

Stability of the factorial structure of metabolic syndrome from childhood to adolescence: a 6-year follow-up study

期刊

CARDIOVASCULAR DIABETOLOGY
卷 10, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1475-2840-10-81

关键词

Tracking; Metabolic syndrome; Confirmatory factor analysis

资金

  1. Estonian Ministry of Education and Science [0180027, 0942706]
  2. Estonian Science Foundation [6932, 6788]
  3. Stockholm County Council
  4. Spanish Ministry of Education [EX-2008-0641]
  5. Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation [RYC-2010-05957]
  6. Swedish Council for Working Life and Social Research
  7. Swedish Heart-Lung Foundation [20090635]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Metabolic syndrome (MS) is a clustering of cardiometabolic risk factors that is considered a predictor of cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes and mortality. There is no consistent evidence on whether the MS construct works in the same way in different populations and at different stages in life. Methods: We used confirmatory factor analysis to examine if a single-factor-model including waist circumference, triglycerides/HDL-c, insulin and mean arterial pressure underlies metabolic syndrome from the childhood to adolescence in a 6-years follow-up study in 174 Swedish and 460 Estonian children aged 9 years at baseline. Indeed, we analyze the tracking of a previously validated MS index over this 6-years period. Results: The estimates of goodness-of-fit for the single-factor-model underlying MS were acceptable both in children and adolescents. The construct stability of a new model including the differences from baseline to the end of the follow-up in the components of the proposed model displayed good fit indexes for the change, supporting the hypothesis of a single factor underlying MS component trends. Conclusions: A single-factor-model underlying MS is stable across the puberty in both Estonian and Swedish young people. The MS index tracks acceptably from childhood to adolescence.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据