首页> 外文期刊>Revista Brasileira de Epidemiologia >Principal Component Analysis and Factor Analysis: differences and similarities in Nutritional Epidemiology application
【24h】

Principal Component Analysis and Factor Analysis: differences and similarities in Nutritional Epidemiology application

机译:主要成分分析与因子分析:营养流行病学应用中的差异与相似性

获取原文
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Introduction: Statistical methods such as Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Factor Analysis (FA) are increasingly popular in Nutritional Epidemiology studies. However, misunderstandings regarding the choice and application of these methods have been observed. Objectives: This study aims to compare and present the main differences and similarities between FA and PCA, focusing on their applicability to nutritional studies. Methods: PCA and FA were applied on a matrix of 34 variables expressing the mean food intake of 1,102 individuals from a population-based study. Results: Two factors were extracted and, together, they explained 57.66% of the common variance of food group variables, while five components were extracted, explaining 26.25% of the total variance of food group variables. Among the main differences of these two methods are: normality assumption, matrices of variance-covariance/correlation and its explained variance, factorial scores, and associated error. The similarities are: both analyses are used for data reduction, the sample size usually needs to be big, correlated data, and they are based on matrices of variance-covariance. Conclusion: PCA and FA should not be treated as equal statistical methods, given that the theoretical rationale and assumptions for using these methods as well as the interpretation of results are different.
机译:简介:统计方法如主成分分析(PCA)和因子分析(FA)在营养流行病学研究中越来越受欢迎。但是,已经观察到有关这些方法的选择和应用的误解。目的:本研究旨在比较和提出FA和PCA之间的主要差异和相似性,重点是他们对营养研究的适用性。方法:PCA和Fa应用于34个变量的基质,表达来自基于人群的研究的1,102个个体的平均食物摄入量。结果:提取两种因素,并在一起,共同解释了食品组变量的常见变异的57.66%,而提取了五种成分,解释了食品组变量总方差的26.25%。这两种方法的主要差异是:正常假设,方差矩阵 - 协方差/相关性及其解释的方差,因子分数和相关错误。相似之处是:两个分析都用于数据,样本量通常需要大,相关数据,并且它们基于方差协方差矩阵。结论:PCA和FA不应被视为平等的统计方法,鉴于使用这些方法的理论理由和假设以及结果的解释是不同的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号