ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2025
Development and preliminary evaluation of the Chinese adult dietary behavior scale.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There is currently no widely accepted multidimensional tool to assess adult dietary behaviors in China. This study developed the Chinese Adults Dietary Behavior Scale (CADBS) to evaluate Chinese adults' eating-related traits and preliminarily examined its reliability, validity, and ability to distinguish different groups. Methods: The scale was developed through three rounds of surveys conducted from 2020 to 2021. Items were screened using item analysis. After item selection, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were used to determine the final structure of the scale, and its reliability, structural validity, and discriminative ability were assessed accordingly. Results: The final scale consisted of 7 dimensions with 39 items: snacking, food responsiveness, emotional eating, restrictive eating, food fussiness, healthy dietary awareness, and external eating. Exploratory factor analysis showed a total cumulative variance contribution rate of 60.60%. Confirmatory factor analysis yielded a Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) of 0.892 and a comparative fit index (CFI) of 0.903. The total scale had a Cronbach's Conclusion: Following standard procedures, this study developed a self-report scale for assessing Chinese adults' dietary behaviors. The CADBS has good reliability and structural validity, making it suitable for epidemiological surveys of dietary behaviors and public health intervention practices. Specifically, it shows that Chinese adults who snack more have stronger food responsiveness and are more likely to be overweight or obese. Conversely, an overweight or obese Chinese adult tends to be restrictive about eating. On the contrary, those with greater healthy dietary awareness are more likely to have a normal weight.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.