Comparison of Dizziness Factors for Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Patients with and without Dizziness: A Factor Analysis and Propensity Score Model Study

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) causes major socioeconomic problems worldwide. In the United States, nearly three-quarters of patients with TBI have mild TBI (mTBI). 32% of these patients may develop dizziness. In this study, we analyzed the factor structure of the traditional Chinese version of the DH...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Computational and mathematical methods in medicine 2021-05, Vol.2021, p.1-8
Hauptverfasser: Ma, Hon-Ping, Ong, Jiann Ruey, Ou, Ju-Chi, Chiang, Yung-Hsiao, Lian, Shoou-Yang
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 8
container_issue
container_start_page 1
container_title Computational and mathematical methods in medicine
container_volume 2021
creator Ma, Hon-Ping
Ong, Jiann Ruey
Ou, Ju-Chi
Chiang, Yung-Hsiao
Lian, Shoou-Yang
description Traumatic brain injury (TBI) causes major socioeconomic problems worldwide. In the United States, nearly three-quarters of patients with TBI have mild TBI (mTBI). 32% of these patients may develop dizziness. In this study, we analyzed the factor structure of the traditional Chinese version of the DHI and evaluate the differences in DHI factors between dizziness and nondizziness groups. In total, 315 patients with mTBI, comprising 158 with self-reported dizziness and 157 without dizziness, were recruited from three hospitals. The responses for Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) demonstrated between-group differences. The Chinese DHI had internal validity and had four factors that differed from the English version (3 aspects). The group effects for the physical subscale remained significantly different even after adjustments in the propensity score model. For the Chinese version, two of four factors remained significantly different in the effects between self-reported dizziness and nondizziness groups. The factors of our Chinese DHI differed from those of the original English version of DHI. After adjustments using the propensity score model, the physical subscale demonstrated significant differences between the self-reported dizziness and nondizziness groups. Only two factors from our Chinese DHI were significantly different; moreover, it contained only three physical, five functional, and three emotional items.
doi_str_mv 10.1155/2021/5571319
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8131139</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2535108013</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c397t-180d0e648b0c6b85f25243d05a5b4198bd78c903bb196976b33dd42a27bd7cd33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU1P3DAQhq2qVaG0t_4AHyuVBU8cJw4HpGXLlwTqSlCpN8uxna5RYi-2Awp_hL9L9kNUXDjNaObRM7JfhL4DOQBg7DAjGRwyVgKF6gPahTLnk6IE_vG1J3930JcY7whhUDL4jHZoThgjlO-i55nvljLY6B32Df5ln56sMzHiM6mSDxE3PuBr22p8G2TfyWQVPgnSOnzp7vow4Pk4Mi5F_GjTAkun143v03_XEZ5udXjqZDtEG9fgPPilcdGmAd8oHwy-9tq0-Cb1eviKPjWyjebbtu6hP2ent7OLydXv88vZ9GqiaFWmCXCiiSlyXhNV1Jw1GctyqgmTrM6h4rUuuaoIrWuoiqosakq1zjOZleNGaUr30PHGu-zrzmg1PiXIViyD7WQYhJdWvN04uxD__IPg438DrUbBj60g-PvexCQ6G5VpW-mM76PIGGVAOIHVrf0NqoKPMZjm9QwQscpSrLIU2yxH_OcGX1in5aN9n34BWW-fuQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2535108013</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of Dizziness Factors for Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Patients with and without Dizziness: A Factor Analysis and Propensity Score Model Study</title><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Ma, Hon-Ping ; Ong, Jiann Ruey ; Ou, Ju-Chi ; Chiang, Yung-Hsiao ; Lian, Shoou-Yang</creator><contributor>Nishizawa, Kazuhisa</contributor><creatorcontrib>Ma, Hon-Ping ; Ong, Jiann Ruey ; Ou, Ju-Chi ; Chiang, Yung-Hsiao ; Lian, Shoou-Yang ; Nishizawa, Kazuhisa</creatorcontrib><description>Traumatic brain injury (TBI) causes major socioeconomic problems worldwide. In the United States, nearly three-quarters of patients with TBI have mild TBI (mTBI). 32% of these patients may develop dizziness. In this study, we analyzed the factor structure of the traditional Chinese version of the DHI and evaluate the differences in DHI factors between dizziness and nondizziness groups. In total, 315 patients with mTBI, comprising 158 with self-reported dizziness and 157 without dizziness, were recruited from three hospitals. The responses for Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) demonstrated between-group differences. The Chinese DHI had internal validity and had four factors that differed from the English version (3 aspects). The group effects for the physical subscale remained significantly different even after adjustments in the propensity score model. For the Chinese version, two of four factors remained significantly different in the effects between self-reported dizziness and nondizziness groups. The factors of our Chinese DHI differed from those of the original English version of DHI. After adjustments using the propensity score model, the physical subscale demonstrated significant differences between the self-reported dizziness and nondizziness groups. Only two factors from our Chinese DHI were significantly different; moreover, it contained only three physical, five functional, and three emotional items.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1748-670X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1748-6718</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1155/2021/5571319</identifier><identifier>PMID: 34055038</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hindawi</publisher><ispartof>Computational and mathematical methods in medicine, 2021-05, Vol.2021, p.1-8</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2021 Hon-Ping Ma et al.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2021 Hon-Ping Ma et al. 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c397t-180d0e648b0c6b85f25243d05a5b4198bd78c903bb196976b33dd42a27bd7cd33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c397t-180d0e648b0c6b85f25243d05a5b4198bd78c903bb196976b33dd42a27bd7cd33</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7568-1451 ; 0000-0003-3549-7283 ; 0000-0002-8426-4016 ; 0000-0003-0778-8761 ; 0000-0002-2273-3235</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8131139/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8131139/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids></links><search><contributor>Nishizawa, Kazuhisa</contributor><creatorcontrib>Ma, Hon-Ping</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ong, Jiann Ruey</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ou, Ju-Chi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chiang, Yung-Hsiao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lian, Shoou-Yang</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of Dizziness Factors for Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Patients with and without Dizziness: A Factor Analysis and Propensity Score Model Study</title><title>Computational and mathematical methods in medicine</title><description>Traumatic brain injury (TBI) causes major socioeconomic problems worldwide. In the United States, nearly three-quarters of patients with TBI have mild TBI (mTBI). 32% of these patients may develop dizziness. In this study, we analyzed the factor structure of the traditional Chinese version of the DHI and evaluate the differences in DHI factors between dizziness and nondizziness groups. In total, 315 patients with mTBI, comprising 158 with self-reported dizziness and 157 without dizziness, were recruited from three hospitals. The responses for Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) demonstrated between-group differences. The Chinese DHI had internal validity and had four factors that differed from the English version (3 aspects). The group effects for the physical subscale remained significantly different even after adjustments in the propensity score model. For the Chinese version, two of four factors remained significantly different in the effects between self-reported dizziness and nondizziness groups. The factors of our Chinese DHI differed from those of the original English version of DHI. After adjustments using the propensity score model, the physical subscale demonstrated significant differences between the self-reported dizziness and nondizziness groups. Only two factors from our Chinese DHI were significantly different; moreover, it contained only three physical, five functional, and three emotional items.</description><issn>1748-670X</issn><issn>1748-6718</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>RHX</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU1P3DAQhq2qVaG0t_4AHyuVBU8cJw4HpGXLlwTqSlCpN8uxna5RYi-2Awp_hL9L9kNUXDjNaObRM7JfhL4DOQBg7DAjGRwyVgKF6gPahTLnk6IE_vG1J3930JcY7whhUDL4jHZoThgjlO-i55nvljLY6B32Df5ln56sMzHiM6mSDxE3PuBr22p8G2TfyWQVPgnSOnzp7vow4Pk4Mi5F_GjTAkun143v03_XEZ5udXjqZDtEG9fgPPilcdGmAd8oHwy-9tq0-Cb1eviKPjWyjebbtu6hP2ent7OLydXv88vZ9GqiaFWmCXCiiSlyXhNV1Jw1GctyqgmTrM6h4rUuuaoIrWuoiqosakq1zjOZleNGaUr30PHGu-zrzmg1PiXIViyD7WQYhJdWvN04uxD__IPg438DrUbBj60g-PvexCQ6G5VpW-mM76PIGGVAOIHVrf0NqoKPMZjm9QwQscpSrLIU2yxH_OcGX1in5aN9n34BWW-fuQ</recordid><startdate>20210511</startdate><enddate>20210511</enddate><creator>Ma, Hon-Ping</creator><creator>Ong, Jiann Ruey</creator><creator>Ou, Ju-Chi</creator><creator>Chiang, Yung-Hsiao</creator><creator>Lian, Shoou-Yang</creator><general>Hindawi</general><scope>RHU</scope><scope>RHW</scope><scope>RHX</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7568-1451</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3549-7283</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8426-4016</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0778-8761</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2273-3235</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210511</creationdate><title>Comparison of Dizziness Factors for Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Patients with and without Dizziness: A Factor Analysis and Propensity Score Model Study</title><author>Ma, Hon-Ping ; Ong, Jiann Ruey ; Ou, Ju-Chi ; Chiang, Yung-Hsiao ; Lian, Shoou-Yang</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c397t-180d0e648b0c6b85f25243d05a5b4198bd78c903bb196976b33dd42a27bd7cd33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ma, Hon-Ping</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ong, Jiann Ruey</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ou, Ju-Chi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chiang, Yung-Hsiao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lian, Shoou-Yang</creatorcontrib><collection>Hindawi Publishing Complete</collection><collection>Hindawi Publishing Subscription Journals</collection><collection>Hindawi Publishing Open Access Journals</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Computational and mathematical methods in medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ma, Hon-Ping</au><au>Ong, Jiann Ruey</au><au>Ou, Ju-Chi</au><au>Chiang, Yung-Hsiao</au><au>Lian, Shoou-Yang</au><au>Nishizawa, Kazuhisa</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of Dizziness Factors for Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Patients with and without Dizziness: A Factor Analysis and Propensity Score Model Study</atitle><jtitle>Computational and mathematical methods in medicine</jtitle><date>2021-05-11</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>2021</volume><spage>1</spage><epage>8</epage><pages>1-8</pages><issn>1748-670X</issn><eissn>1748-6718</eissn><abstract>Traumatic brain injury (TBI) causes major socioeconomic problems worldwide. In the United States, nearly three-quarters of patients with TBI have mild TBI (mTBI). 32% of these patients may develop dizziness. In this study, we analyzed the factor structure of the traditional Chinese version of the DHI and evaluate the differences in DHI factors between dizziness and nondizziness groups. In total, 315 patients with mTBI, comprising 158 with self-reported dizziness and 157 without dizziness, were recruited from three hospitals. The responses for Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) demonstrated between-group differences. The Chinese DHI had internal validity and had four factors that differed from the English version (3 aspects). The group effects for the physical subscale remained significantly different even after adjustments in the propensity score model. For the Chinese version, two of four factors remained significantly different in the effects between self-reported dizziness and nondizziness groups. The factors of our Chinese DHI differed from those of the original English version of DHI. After adjustments using the propensity score model, the physical subscale demonstrated significant differences between the self-reported dizziness and nondizziness groups. Only two factors from our Chinese DHI were significantly different; moreover, it contained only three physical, five functional, and three emotional items.</abstract><pub>Hindawi</pub><pmid>34055038</pmid><doi>10.1155/2021/5571319</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7568-1451</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3549-7283</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8426-4016</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0778-8761</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2273-3235</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1748-670X
ispartof Computational and mathematical methods in medicine, 2021-05, Vol.2021, p.1-8
issn 1748-670X
1748-6718
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8131139
source PubMed Central Open Access; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection); PubMed Central; Alma/SFX Local Collection
title Comparison of Dizziness Factors for Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Patients with and without Dizziness: A Factor Analysis and Propensity Score Model Study
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-02T17%3A09%3A21IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20Dizziness%20Factors%20for%20Mild%20Traumatic%20Brain%20Injury%20Patients%20with%20and%20without%20Dizziness:%20A%20Factor%20Analysis%20and%20Propensity%20Score%20Model%20Study&rft.jtitle=Computational%20and%20mathematical%20methods%20in%20medicine&rft.au=Ma,%20Hon-Ping&rft.date=2021-05-11&rft.volume=2021&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=8&rft.pages=1-8&rft.issn=1748-670X&rft.eissn=1748-6718&rft_id=info:doi/10.1155/2021/5571319&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2535108013%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2535108013&rft_id=info:pmid/34055038&rfr_iscdi=true