ArticleNursing open2025
Intrinsic Motivation Inventory for Heart-Healthy Lifestyle (IMI-HeartLife) in Cardiovascular Disease Prevention: A Validation Study.
Article in Nursing open, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo validate a modified version of the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI)-the IMI-HeartLife-adapted for heart-healthy lifestyle behaviours in community-dwelling adults without a history of cardiovascular disease. While the original IMI has been validated in contexts such as competitive sports and education, its use in healthcare-particularly for cardiovascular disease prevention-has been limited.
designA validation study addressing content and construct validity and reliability.
methodsThe IMI-HeartLife was refined through three phases: (1) conceptualisation and item pool generation, (2) evaluation of content and face validity and (3) psychometric evaluation. As part of the psychometric evaluation, two established instruments were employed to assess the discriminant and convergent validity of the IMI-HeartLife scale.
resultsA total of 703 community-dwelling adults were recruited and randomly assigned to two subsamples for exploratory (n = 352) and confirmatory (n = 351) factor analyses. From the initial 32 items drawn from five original IMI subscales, 16 were retained. A three-factor structure-Interest/Enjoyment, Choice/Value/Usefulness and Competence/Effort-was supported (CMIN/DF = 3.43, SRMR = 0.06, RMSEA = 0.08, CFI = 0.95, TLI = 0.94). Discriminant and convergent validity of the IMI-HeartLife were confirmed, and internal consistency and test-retest reliability were acceptable.
conclusionsThe 16-item IMI-HeartLife demonstrated good validity and reliability as a measure of intrinsic motivation to promote heart-healthy lifestyle in cardiovascular disease prevention. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION: In community and primary care settings, nurses are well positioned to assess intrinsic motivation as a core cognitive construct and to deliver personalised interventions that promote heart-healthy lifestyle behaviours in the context of cardiovascular disease prevention. Within this framework, the IMI-HeartLife may serve as a valuable instrument for assessing intrinsic motivation and guiding individualised nursing strategies. REPORTING
methodCOSMIN reporting guideline for studies on measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROM): version 2.0. PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT: The content analysis was conducted in collaboration with an interdisciplinary user group including eight healthcare professionals.
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.