A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

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

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.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1980-549720190041DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

principal component
8
component analysis
8
factor analysis
8
differences similarities
8
nutritional epidemiology
8
statistical methods
8
main differences
8
variance food
8
food group
8
group variables
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!