Toward a Romanian version of the three-factor eating questionnaire-R21 for children and adolescents (CTFEQ-R21) : preliminary psychometric analysis and relation with body composition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Purpose: The aim of this study was to develop and validate a Romanian version of the Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire-R21 for children and adolescents CTFEQ-R21, and to assess its psychometric properties and factor structure. Associations between the present version of the CTFEQ-R21 and anthropometric measures as well as body composition were also examined. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Material and methods: 153 children and adolescents (68 boys and 95 girls; 10.8±3.5 years) took part in this study (BMI of 17.7±3.1 kg/m²). The participants were first interviewed to ascertain their understanding of the CTFEQ-R21 and were then asked to self-complete the questionnaire. Height and weight were measured and body composition assessed using bio impedance analyzers (Tanita MC 780). RESULTS: Results: The CTFEQ-R21 showed satisfactory internal consistency (Cronbach's α=0.78). Cronbach's alpha coefficients were 0.55 for CR (cognitive restriction), 0.75 for UE (Uncontrolled Eating), and 0.76 for EE (Emotional Eating) separately. UE and EE were found to be significantly correlated (r=0.54, p<0.05). The three factors explained 43% of the total variance. Correlation between CR, UE and EE with body weight, BMI and FFM were significant but low to moderate, with coefficients ranging from 0.20 to 0.37. The higher the CR, UE and EE tertiles, the higher the weight, fat mass (kg) and fat-free mass values. CONCLUSION: Conclusions: According to the psychometric analysis of the questionnaire, the version of the CTFEQ-R21 proposed here is a satisfactory tool to assess eating behaviors in the Romanian child population that remains to be further developed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".