Dataset Information

Domain-Specific Adult Sedentary Behaviour Questionnaire (ASBQ) and the GPAQ Single-Item Question: A Reliability and Validity Study in an Asian Population.

ABSTRACT: This study examined the validity and reliability of a domain-specific Adult Sedentary Behaviour Questionnaire (ASBQ) and the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ) single-item sitting question using self- and interviewer-administered modes of administration against the triaxial ActiGraph wGT3X-BT accelerometer. The ASBQ and the GPAQ were administered twice, seven days apart. Participants were asked to put on the waist-worn accelerometer for seven days. Convergent validity was assessed using Spearman's rho, mean absolute error (MAE), and Bland-Altman analysis (n = 78). Reliability was assessed using the Spearman's rho and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) (n = 84). Participants were adults aged 20-65 years and identifying as Chinese, Malay, or Indian. Only the self-administered GPAQ was significantly correlated with accelerometry-based measures (rho: 0.46), but not the interviewer-administered version (rho: 0.12). MAE for GPAQ was 207.5-218.3 min/day in relation to the accelerometer and for ASBQ was 154.7-174.6 min/day. Bland-Altman plots demonstrated large limits of agreement between questionnaire and accelerometry-based measures. While the self-administered GPAQ demonstrated a moderate correlation with accelerometry, the mean bias and the limits of agreement were large. The GPAQ (rho: 0.68-0.79; ICC: 0.68-0.78) and the ASBQ (rho: 0.53-0.64; ICC: 0.66-0.74) showed moderate-to-good reliability for total sedentary time using either self- or interviewer-administration. Future research should incorporate accelerometers to generate useful sedentary behaviour measures.

SUBMITTER: Chu AHY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5923781 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Domain-Specific Adult Sedentary Behaviour Questionnaire (ASBQ) and the GPAQ Single-Item Question: A Reliability and Validity Study in an Asian Population.

Chu Anne H Y AHY Ng Sheryl H X SHX Koh David D Müller-Riemenschneider Falk F

International journal of environmental research and public health 20180412 4

This study examined the validity and reliability of a domain-specific Adult Sedentary Behaviour Questionnaire (ASBQ) and the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ) single-item sitting question using self- and interviewer-administered modes of administration against the triaxial ActiGraph wGT3X-BT accelerometer. The ASBQ and the GPAQ were administered twice, seven days apart. Participants were asked to put on the waist-worn accelerometer for seven days. Convergent validity was assessed usi ...[more]

PMID: 29649161

Similar Datasets

Project description:Feasible and cost-effective as well as population specific instruments for monitoring physical activity (PA) levels are needed for the management and prevention of non-communicable diseases. The WHO-endorsed Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ) has been widely used in developing countries, but the evidence base for its validity, particularly for rural populations, is still limited. The aim of the study was to validate GPAQ among rural and urban residents in Bangladesh.A total of 162 healthy participants of both genders aged 18-60 years were recruited from Satia village (n = 97) and Dhaka City (n = 65). Participants were invited to take part in the study and were asked to wear an accelerometer (GT3X) for 7 days, after which they were invited to answer the GPAQ in a face to face interview.Valid accelerometer data (i.e., ≥10 h of wear times over ≥3 days) were received from 155 participants (rural = 94, urban = 61). The mean age was 35 (SD = ±9) years, 55% were females and 19% of the participants had no schooling, which was higher in the rural area (21% vs 17%). The mean ± SD steps/day was 9998 ± 3936 (8658 ± 2788 and 12,063 ± 4534 for rural and urban respectively, p = 0.0001) and the mean ± SD daily moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) was 58 ± 30 min (51 ± 26 for rural and 69 ± 34 for the urban, p = 0.001) for accelerometer. In case of GPAQ, rural residents reported significantly higher moderate work related PA (MET-minutes/week: 600 vs. 360 p = 0.02). Spearman correlation coefficients between GPAQ total MVPA MET-min/day and accelerometer MVPA min/day, counts per minute (CPM) or steps counts/day were acceptable for urban residents (rho: 0.46, 0.55 and 0.63, respectively; p < 0.01) but poor for rural residents. The overall correlation between the GPAQ and accelerometer for sitting was low (rho: 0.23; p < 0.001). GPAQ-Accelerometer correlation for MVPA was higher for females (rho: 0.42), ≤35 age group (rho: 0.31) and those with higher education attainment (rho: 0.48). The Bland-Altman plots illustrated bias towards over estimation of GPAQ MVPA with increased activity levels for urban and rural residents.GPAQ is an acceptable measure for physical activity surveillance in Bangladesh particularly for urban residents, women and people with high education. Given waist worn accelerometers do not capture the typical PA in rural context, further study using a physical activity diary and a combination of multiple sensors (e.g., wrist, ankle and waist worn accelerometers) to capture all movement is warranted among rural population with purposive sampling of all education levels.

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the discriminant validity of three different single-question assessments of subjective cognitive complaints (SCC) for dementia in a community-based older adult population in Singapore.MethodsEligible older adults aged ≥60 were recruited into phase I for identifying those who require further assessment using the Abbreviated Mental Test (AMT) and progressive forgetfulness question (PFQ). Participants who failed either tests entered phase II and were administered various single-question assessments of SCC, such as the 8th question on the patient Ascertain Dementia 8 (AD8-8pt), informant AD8 (AD8-8info), and the 10th item on the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-10), followed by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and a formal neuropsychological battery to identify the participant's cognitive status by a research diagnosis and DSM-IV criteria. Differences in characteristics among diagnostic groups were compared. All discriminatory indices (sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values, overall accuracy) for these single-question assessments and their combinations with the MoCA were calculated and reported to confirm their discriminant validity in identifying the existence of subjective complaints and objective impairment.ResultsA total of 3,780 participants were assessed at phase I, of which 957 entered and completed phase II. Of whom, 911 were dementia-free and 46 had dementia. The MoCA (13/14) displayed good sensitivity (95.6%), specificity (81.5%), and overall accuracy (82.1%) for dementia detection. The GDS-10 and AD8-8pt showed poor discriminant validity, while the AD8-8info had the highest specificity (83.2%) and the greatest overall accuracy (82.5%) for dementia. Compensatory combination of the AD8-8info with MoCA, the sensitivity and positive predictive values were optimized (100%), while the conjunctive combination of two tools achieved excellent specificity (96.3%) and overall accuracy (94.8%) in discriminating dementia patients.Conclusion and implicationsCombining a reliable single-question SCC assessment with an objective tool can efficiently discriminate dementia patients from healthy older adults in the community.

Project description:PurposeThe study aimed to test the validity and reliability of the Arabic version of the sedentary behavior questionnaire (SBQ).MethodsA total of 624 university students (273 males; 351 females, mean age = 20.8 years) were recruited from Taibah University, Madinah, Saudi Arabia. For criterion and constructive validity (n = 352), the Arabic SBQ was compared with total sitting time from the International Physical Activity Questionnaire-short form (IPAQ-SF) and the International Physical Activity Questionnaire-long form (IPAQ-LF). For concurrent validity, the English and Arabic SBQ versions were given concurrently to bilingual university students (n = 122) once. For test-retest reliability, the Arabic SBQ was given twice to participants (n = 150) at a one-week interval.ResultsSitting time of IPAQ-SF (7th question: sitting time on weekdays) and IPAQ-LF (21st question: sitting time on weekdays and 22nd question: sitting time on weekends) correlated significantly with total sitting time/week of the Arabic SBQ (r = 0.29, p = 0.003; r = 0.14, p = 0.02, respectively). Motorized transportation measured with the IPAQ-LF correlated significantly with time spent driving in a car, bus, or train from the Arabic SBQ on weekdays and weekends (r = 0.53, p < 0.001; r = 0.44 p < 0.001, respectively). The total sitting time of the Arabic SBQ was inversely correlated with BMI (r = -0.18, p = 0.001). The correlations between the Arabic and the English SBQ versions ranged from 0.25-0.96; p < 0.001 on weekdays and 0.50-0.90; p < 0.001 on weekends. Moderate to good reliability was also found between test and retest for all SBQ items and total score during weekdays (0.72 to 0.8), and weekends (0.64 to 0.87), with exception of the 7th item "play musical instrument", ICC = 0.46). Mean difference of test-retest of the Arabic SBQ was not significantly different from zero for the total sitting time of the Arabic SBQ (t = -0.715, P = 0.476).ConclusionThe Arabic SBQ had satisfactory levels of reliability, with total sitting time of the Arabic SBQ correlating significantly with sitting times derived from IPAQ-SF, IPAQ-LF, and the English SBQ versions. Hence, the Arabic SBQ can be used as a tool to measure sedentary behavior among adult Arabs aged between 18 to 30 years old in future epidemiologic and clinical practice.

Project description:BackgroundSubjective measures of sedentary behaviour (SB) (i.e. questionnaires and diaries/logs) are widely implemented, and can be useful for capturing type and context of SBs. However, little is known about comparative validity and reliability. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to: 1) identify subjective methods to assess overall, domain- and behaviour-specific SB, and 2) examine the validity and reliability of these methods.MethodsThe databases MEDLINE, EMBASE and SPORTDiscus were searched up to March 2020. Inclusion criteria were: 1) assessment of SB, 2) evaluation of subjective measurement tools, 3) being performed in healthy adults, 4) manuscript written in English, and 5) paper was peer-reviewed. Data of validity and/or reliability measurements was extracted from included studies and a meta-analysis using random effects was performed to assess the pooled correlation coefficients of the validity.ResultsThe systematic search resulted in 2423 hits. After excluding duplicates and screening on title and abstract, 82 studies were included with 75 self-reported measurement tools. There was wide variability in the measurement properties and quality of the studies. The criterion validity varied between poor-to-excellent (correlation coefficient [R] range - 0.01- 0.90) with logs/diaries (R = 0.63 [95%CI 0.48-0.78]) showing higher criterion validity compared to questionnaires (R = 0.35 [95%CI 0.32-0.39]). Furthermore, correlation coefficients of single- and multiple-item questionnaires were comparable (1-item R = 0.34; 2-to-9-items R = 0.35; ≥10-items R = 0.37). The reliability of SB measures was moderate-to-good, with the quality of these studies being mostly fair-to-good.ConclusionLogs and diaries are recommended to validly and reliably assess self-reported SB. However, due to time and resources constraints, 1-item questionnaires may be preferred to subjectively assess SB in large-scale observations when showing similar validity and reliability compared to longer questionnaires.Registration numberCRD42018105994.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ) is applied internationally as a tool to assess the level of physical activity. The GPAQ was designed as an interview, including the use of show cards, which visualise activities of moderate and intensive physical activity and support the distinction between these intensities. The self-administered version of the GPAQ is used in the application-oriented research for reasons of economy and practicality. However, the use of show cards often remains unknown. The aim of the present study was to examine differences in validity between two self-administered versions of the GPAQ with and without show cards. METHODS:In this crossover study, two groups (n?=?54; 57.4% female; 28.3?±?12.2?years) received the GPAQ with or without show cards after 7 days and the respective other version after additional 7 days. For validation, all participants wore an accelerometer (ActiGraph GT3X+) on all 14?days. Differences between GPAQ versions and accelerometer data were compared by Wilcoxon signed rank test. Additionally, Spearman analyses and Bland-Altman plots were calculated. RESULTS:No statistically significant difference between the GPAQ versions could be found in regard to the accuracy of physical activity assessment (p?>?0.05). Both GPAQ versions show similar correlation coefficients for vigorous physical activity (rho?=?0.31-0.42) and sedentary behaviour (rho?=?0.29-0.32). No statistically significant correlation was found for physical activity of moderate intensity. The Bland-Altman plots support these results, as both GPAQ versions have the same trends in terms of overestimation and underestimation of physical activity. CONCLUSION:The use of show cards had no significant impact on questionnaire validity. Therefore, both GPAQ versions can be applied interchangeably. Nevertheless the exact description of application of the GPAQ is desirable in terms of reproducibility and transparent scientific research.

Dataset Information

Domain-Specific Adult Sedentary Behaviour Questionnaire (ASBQ) and the GPAQ Single-Item Question: A Reliability and Validity Study in an Asian Population.

Publications

Domain-Specific Adult Sedentary Behaviour Questionnaire (ASBQ) and the GPAQ Single-Item Question: A Reliability and Validity Study in an Asian Population.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets