Dataset Information

Current Evidence of Measurement Properties of Physical Activity Questionnaires for Older Adults: An Updated Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Questionnaires provide valuable information about physical activity (PA) behaviors in older adults. Until now, no firm recommendations for the most qualified questionnaires for older adults have been provided.

Objectives

This review is an update of a previous systematic review, published in 2010, and aims to summarize, appraise and compare the measurement properties of all available self-administered questionnaires assessing PA in older adults.

Methods

We included the articles evaluated in the previous review and conducted a new search in PubMed, Embase, and SPORTDiscus from September 2008 to December 2019, using the following inclusion criteria (1) the purpose of the study was to evaluate at least one measurement property (reliability, measurement error, hypothesis testing for construct validity, responsiveness) of a self-administered questionnaire; (2) the questionnaire intended to measure PA; (3) the questionnaire covered at least one domain of PA; (4) the study was performed in the general, healthy population of older adults; (5) the mean age of the study population was >?55 years; and (6) the article was published in English. Based on the Quality Assessment of Physical Activity Questionnaires (QAPAQ) checklist, we evaluated the quality and results of the studies. The content validity of all included questionnaires was also evaluated using the reviewers' rating. The quality of the body of evidence was evaluated for the overall construct of each questionnaire (e.g., total PA), moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) and walking using a modified Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

Results

In total, 56 articles on 40 different questionnaires (14 from the previous review and 26 from the update) were included. Reliability was assessed for 22, measurement error for four and hypotheses testing for construct validity for 38 different questionnaires. Evidence for responsiveness was available for one questionnaire. For many questionnaires, only one measurement property was assessed in only a single study. Sufficient content validity was considered for 22 questionnaires. All questionnaires displayed large measurement errors. Only versions of two questionnaires showed both sufficient reliability and hypotheses testing for construct validity, namely the Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly (PASE; English version, Turkish version) for the assessment of total PA, and the Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior Questionnaire (PASB-Q; English version) for the assessment of MVPA. The quality of evidence for these results ranged from very low to high.

Conclusions

Until more high-quality evidence is available, we recommend the PASE for measuring total PA and the PASB-Q for measuring MVPA in older adults. However, they are not equally qualified among different languages. Future studies on the most promising questionnaires should cover all relevant measurement properties. We recommend using and improving existing PA questionnaires-instead of developing new ones-and considering the strengths and weaknesses of each PA measurement instrument for a particular purpose.

SUBMITTER: Sattler MC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7305082 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Current Evidence of Measurement Properties of Physical Activity Questionnaires for Older Adults: An Updated Systematic Review.

Sattler Matteo C MC Jaunig Johannes J Tösch Christoph C Watson Estelle D ED Mokkink Lidwine B LB Dietz Pavel P van Poppel Mireille N M MNM

Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) 20200701 7

<h4>Background</h4>Questionnaires provide valuable information about physical activity (PA) behaviors in older adults. Until now, no firm recommendations for the most qualified questionnaires for older adults have been provided.<h4>Objectives</h4>This review is an update of a previous systematic review, published in 2010, and aims to summarize, appraise and compare the measurement properties of all available self-administered questionnaires assessing PA in older adults.<h4>Methods</h4>We include ...[more]

PMID: 32125670

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn order to assess physical activity (PA) during pregnancy, it is important to choose the instrument with the best measurement properties.ObjectivesTo systematically summarize, appraise, and compare the measurement properties of all self-administered questionnaires assessing PA in pregnancy.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, and SPORTDiscus with the following inclusion criteria: (i) the study reported at least one measurement property (reliability, criterion validity, construct validity, responsiveness) of a self-administered questionnaire; (ii) the questionnaire intended to measure PA; (iii) the questionnaire was evaluated in healthy pregnant women; and (iv) the study was published in English. We evaluated results, quality of individual studies, and quality of evidence using a standardized checklist (Quality Assessment of Physical Activity Questionnaires [QAPAQ]) and the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach.ResultsSeventeen articles, reporting 18 studies of 11 different PA questionnaires (17 versions), were included. Most questionnaire versions showed insufficient measurement properties. Only the French and Turkish versions of the Pregnancy Physical Activity Questionnaire (PPAQ) showed both sufficient reliability and construct validity. However, all versions of the PPAQ pooled together showed insufficient construct validity. The quality of individual studies was usually high for reliability but varied considerably for construct validity. Overall, the quality of evidence was very low to moderate.ConclusionsWe recommend the PPAQ to assess PA in pregnancy, although the pooled results revealed insufficient construct validity. The lack of appropriate standards in data collection and processing criteria for objective devices in measuring PA during pregnancy attenuates the quality of evidence. Therefore, research on the validity of comparison instruments in pregnancy followed by consensus on validation reference criteria and standards of PA measurement is needed.

Project description:BackgroundContinuity of care is widely acknowledged as a core value in family medicine. In this systematic review, we aimed to identify the instruments measuring continuity of care and to assess the quality of their measurement properties.MethodsWe did a systematic review using the PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO databases, with an extensive search strategy including 'continuity of care', 'coordination of care', 'integration of care', 'patient centered care', 'case management' and its linguistic variations. We searched from 1995 to October 2011 and included articles describing the development and/or evaluation of the measurement properties of instruments measuring one or more dimensions of continuity of care (1) care from the same provider who knows and follows the patient (personal continuity), (2) communication and cooperation between care providers in one care setting (team continuity), and (3) communication and cooperation between care providers in different care settings (cross-boundary continuity). We assessed the methodological quality of the measurement properties of each instrument using the COSMIN checklist.ResultsWe included 24 articles describing the development and/or evaluation of 21 instruments. Ten instruments measured all three dimensions of continuity of care. Instruments were developed for different groups of patients or providers. For most instruments, three or four of the six measurement properties were assessed (mostly internal consistency, content validity, structural validity and construct validity). Six instruments scored positive on the quality of at least three of six measurement properties.ConclusionsMost included instruments have problems with either the number or quality of its assessed measurement properties or the ability to measure all three dimensions of continuity of care. Based on the results of this review, we recommend the use of one of the four most promising instruments, depending on the target population Diabetes Continuity of Care Questionnaire, Alberta Continuity of Services Scale-Mental Health, Heart Continuity of Care Questionnaire, and Nijmegen Continuity Questionnaire.

Project description:BackgroundDue to physiological and cognitive changes that occur with aging, accurate physical activity (PA) measurement in older adults represents a unique challenge. The primary purpose of this study was to systematically review measures of PA and their use and appropriateness with older adults. A secondary aim was to determine the level of agreement between PA measures in older adults.MethodsLiterature was identified through electronic databases. Studies were eligible if they examined the correlation and/or agreement between at least 2 measures, either indirect and/or direct, of PA in older adults (> 65 years of age).ResultsThirty-six studies met eligibility criteria. The indirect and direct measures of PA across the studies differed widely in their ability to address the key dimensions (i.e., frequency, intensity, time, type) of PA in older adults. The average correlation between indirect and direct measures was moderate (r=0.38). The correlation between indirect and other indirect measures (r=0.29) was weak, while correlations between direct measures with other direct measures were high (real world: r= 0.84; controlled settings: r=0.92). Agreement was strongest between direct PA measures with other direct measures in both real world and laboratory settings. While a clear trend regarding the agreement for mean differences between other PA measures (i.e., direct with indirect, indirect with indirect) did not emerge, there were only a limited number of studies that reported comparable units.ConclusionsDespite the lack of a clear trend regarding the agreement between PA measures in older adults, the findings underscore the importance of valid, accurate and reliable measurement. To advance this field, researchers will need to approach the assessment of PA in older adults in a more standardized way (i.e., consistent reporting of results, consensus over cut-points and epoch lengths, using appropriate validation tools). Until then researchers should be cautious when choosing measures for PA that are appropriate for their research questions and when comparing PA levels across various studies.

Project description:BackgroundNumerous instruments are designed to measure digital literacy among the general population. However, few studies have assessed the use and appropriateness of these measurements for older populations.ObjectiveThis systematic review aims to identify and critically appraise studies assessing digital literacy among older adults and to evaluate how digital literacy instruments used in existing studies address the elements of age-appropriate digital literacy using the European Commission's Digital Competence (DigComp) Framework.MethodsElectronic databases were searched for studies using validated instruments to assess digital literacy among older adults. The quality of all included studies was evaluated using the Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool (CCAT). Instruments were assessed according to their ability to incorporate the competence areas of digital literacy as defined by the DigComp Framework: (1) information and data literacy, (2) communication and collaboration, (3) digital content creation, (4) safety, and (5) problem-solving ability, or attitudes toward information and communication technology use.ResultsSearches yielded 1561 studies, of which 27 studies (17 cross-sectional, 2 before and after, 2 randomized controlled trials, 1 longitudinal, and 1 mixed methods) were included in the final analysis. Studies were conducted in the United States (18/27), Germany (3/27), China (1/27), Italy (1/27), Sweden (1/27), Canada (1/27), Iran (1/27), and Bangladesh (1/27). Studies mostly defined older adults as aged ≥50 years (10/27) or ≥60 years (8/27). Overall, the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS) was the most frequently used instrument measuring digital literacy among older adults (16/27, 59%). Scores on the CCAT ranged from 34 (34/40, 85%) to 40 (40/40, 100%). Most instruments measured 1 or 2 of the DigComp Framework's elements, but the Mobile Device Proficiency Questionnaire (MDPQ) measured all 5 elements, including "digital content creation" and "safety."ConclusionsThe current digital literacy assessment instruments targeting older adults have both strengths and weaknesses, relative to their study design, administration method, and ease of use. Certain instrument modalities like the MDPQ are more generalizable and inclusive and thus, favorable for measuring the digital literacy of older adults. More studies focusing on the suitability of such instruments for older populations are warranted, especially for areas like "digital content creation" and "safety" that currently lack assessment. Evidence-based discussions regarding the implications of digitalization for the treatment of older adults and how health care professionals may benefit from this phenomenon are encouraged.

Project description:IntroductionSexual function of patients with endometriosis should be assessed by patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) that present high reliability and validity. The objective was to study the PROMs used to assess sexual function for patients with endometriosis to improve their selection for research and clinical practice.Material and methodsWe performed a systematic literature review from January 2000 to September 2023. All studies including women with confirmed endometriosis and assessing sexual quality of life or sexual function or sexual distress were retrieved. Different properties of PROMs used for sexual dysfunction were assessed according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) recommendations. Properties evaluated were: structural validity, internal consistency, cross-cultural validity, reliability, measurement error, criterion validity, construct validity, and responsiveness. This literature review was registered on Prospero as 2018 CRD42018102278.ResultsSeventy-four articles with evaluation of sexual function were included. Of the 25 PROMs assessing sexual function, the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) was the most frequently used (34/74 [45.9%] items), followed by the Female Sexual Distress Scale (9/74 [12.2%] items) and the Sexual Activity Questionnaire (SAQ) (8/74 [10.8%] items). The most commonly used measurement properties were "hypothesis testing" and "responsiveness". The PROMs with a high level of evidence for these two measurement properties were the FSFI, the SAQ, the Short Sexual Functioning Scale, the Sexual Satisfaction Scale for Women, Sexual Quality of Life-Female, the Brief Profile of Female Sexual Function, and the Sexual Health Outcomes in Women Questionnaire. The FSFI questionnaire appeared to be more relevant for evaluating medical treatment, and the SAQ for evaluating surgical treatment. Only one instrument was specific to endometriosis (the Subjective Impact of Dyspareunia Inventory [SIDI]).ConclusionsIn this systematic literature review of sexual function assessment questionnaires in endometriosis, the FSFI and the SAQ questionnaires emerged as having the best measurement properties according to the COSMIN criteria. The FSFI questionnaire appears to be suited for evaluating medical treatment, and the SAQ for surgical treatment. The SIDI is the only specific questionnaire, but its responsiveness remains to be defined.

Dataset Information

Current Evidence of Measurement Properties of Physical Activity Questionnaires for Older Adults: An Updated Systematic Review.

Background

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Current Evidence of Measurement Properties of Physical Activity Questionnaires for Older Adults: An Updated Systematic Review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets