ABSTRACT
Abstract Objectives This analysis describes the protocol of a study with a case-cohort to design to prospectively evaluate the incidence of subclinical atherosclerosis and Cardiovascular Disease (CVD) in Chronic Inflammatory Disease (CID) participants compared to non-diseased ones. Methods A high-risk group for CID was defined based on data collected in all visits on self-reported medical diagnosis, use of medicines, and levels of high-sensitivity C-Reactive Protein >10 mg/L. The comparison group is the Aleatory Cohort Sample (ACS): a group with 10% of participants selected at baseline who represent the entire cohort. In both groups, specific biomarkers for DIC, markers of subclinical atherosclerosis, and CVD morbimortality will be tested using weighted Cox. Results The high-risk group (n = 2,949; aged 53.6 ± 9.2; 65.5% women) and the ACS (n=1543; 52.2±8.8; 54.1% women) were identified. Beyond being older and mostly women, participants in the high-risk group present low average income (29.1% vs. 24.8%, p < 0.0001), higher BMI (Kg/m2) (28.1 vs. 26.9, p < 0.0001), higher waist circumference (cm) (93.3 vs. 91, p < 0.0001), higher frequencies of hypertension (40.2% vs. 34.5%, p < 0.0001), diabetes (20.7% vs. 17%, p = 0.003) depression (5.8% vs. 3.9%, p = 0.007) and higher levels of GlycA a new inflammatory marker (p < 0.0001) compared to the ACS. Conclusions The high-risk group selected mostly women, older, lower-income/education, higher BMI, waist circumference, and of hypertension, diabetes, depression, and higher levels of GlycA when compared to the ACS. The strategy chosen to define the high-risk group seems adequate given that multiple sociodemographic and clinical characteristics are compatible with CID.
ABSTRACT
Abstract Background Health-related control and self-efficacy beliefs can be assessed in the general population using Multidimensional Health Locus of Control-A subscales (MHLC-A) and the General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES), respectively. Objective To test construct validity, internal consistency, reliability (test-retest) and ceiling and floor effects of Portuguese-Brazil versions of MHLC-A and GSES. Method Civil servants (N=2901) enrolled in a large Brazilian cohort were included. A new version of the GSES was produced (GSES-Brazil). Procedures for cross-cultural adaptation and testing of psychometric properties followed well-accepted international guidelines. Results Confirmatory factor analyses yielded the following indices: MHLC-A (tridimensional model): χ2[df]=223.45[132], p-value <0.01; CFI=0.87; TLI=0.85; RMSEA=0.07 (0.07-0.08); WRMR=3.00. GSES-Brazil (unidimensional model): χ2[df]=788.60[35], p-value <0.01; CFI=0.95; TLI=0.94; RMSEA=0.09 (0.08-0.09); WRMR=2.50. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients and Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC2,1) ranged from 0.57 (0.54-0.59) and 0.57 (0.47-0.65) for MHLC-A internality to 0.80 (0.79-0.81) and 0.71 (0.66-0.77) for GSES-Brazil, respectively. There was no evidence of ceiling and floor effects. Convergent validity analyses provided further support for construct validity of both scales. Conclusion These findings support the use of the newly developed version of GSES-Brazil for the assessment of general self-efficacy of adult Brazilians. Internal consistency was lower than ideal for MHLC-A, indicating these subscales may need further refinements to provide a more psychometrically sound measure of control beliefs.