Lifestyle, a major determinant of health status, comprises a number of habits and behaviours that form a part of daily life. People with healthy lifestyles have a better quality of life, suffer less disease, and have a longer life expectancy. This work reports the design and content validation of a questionnaire—the ‘PONTE A 100’ questionnaire—assessing the lifestyle of adults. This collects information across five dimensions—‘Eating Habits’, ‘Physical Activity’, ‘Smoking and use of Alcohol and other Drugs’, ‘Emotional Wellbeing’, and ‘Safety and Non-intentional Injuries’—via the answering of a total 33 items. Psychometric validation of the instrument’s content was obtained via expert opinions. This was performed by two rounds of assessment and involved 34 experts representing different health science disciplines (mean experience, 27.4 ± 9.4 years). At the end of each round, adjustments were made according to their recommendations. Agreement between the experts was examined using the Aiken V test. A final V value of 0.95 (95% CI, 0.90–1.00) was obtained for the questionnaire as a whole, highlighting the validity of its content. The questionnaire would therefore appear to be an appropriate instrument for assessing the lifestyle of adults.

Background/Objective: The impact that lifestyle has on someone’s health has been widely proven. And the lifestyle can also be highly influenced by the sociodemographic background; however, there is less literature that focuses on this matter. Hence, the objective of the present study is to analyze the influence of sociodemographic variables on the lifestyle of the adult population. Methods: A cross-sectional multicenter study was conducted in 20 health centers of the Community of Madrid (Spain). A total of 365 participants were scheduled for nursing consultations and recruited through systematic probabilistic sampling. Lifestyle was assessed using the “Ponte a 100” questionnaire; based on the total score achieved by the participants, these were categorized into four groups depending on their need to adopt healthier lifestyle habits: minimal need (80–100 points), mild need (60–79 points), moderate need (40–59 points), and high need (<39 points). Results: Values ranged from 23 to 98 points in the Lifestyle Index (ISEV), with an average of 71.8 (SD = 14.6 points). Older individuals had better eating habits (β = −1.982), while younger individuals had better physical activity habits and a higher consumption of toxic substances. Men consumed more alcohol (β = −2.307) and felt happier with their lives, while women took more active breaks. Being a student was associated with higher levels of stress and anxiety, lower physical activity and leisure time, and higher alcohol consumption. Retirees had better emotional well-being indices (β = 0.999). Lower income levels were associated with occasional drug use and poorer emotional well-being. People with university degrees had better emotional states (β = 0.861) and better eating habits (β = 1.652) and engaged in more intense physical activity. Having no chronic diseases was related to being more physically active (β = 1.789). Conclusions: The study population generally presents a healthy lifestyle. The dimension of emotional well-being was the most influenced by sociodemographic factors. This study contributes to understanding the impact of socioeconomic variables on lifestyle.