Active adults recall their physical activity differently to less active adults: test-retest reliability and validity of a physical activity survey

Fjeldsoe, Brianna S., Winkler, Elisabeth A. H., Marshall, Alison L., Eakin, Elizabeth G. and Reeves, Marina M. (2013) Active adults recall their physical activity differently to less active adults: test-retest reliability and validity of a physical activity survey. Health Promotion Journal of Australia, 24 1: 26-31. doi:10.1071/HE12912

Attached Files (Some files may be inaccessible until you login with your UQ eSpace credentials)
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads
UQ301111_postprint.pdf Full text (open access) application/pdf 424.71KB 0

Author Fjeldsoe, Brianna S.
Winkler, Elisabeth A. H.
Marshall, Alison L.
Eakin, Elizabeth G.
Reeves, Marina M.
Title Active adults recall their physical activity differently to less active adults: test-retest reliability and validity of a physical activity survey
Journal name Health Promotion Journal of Australia   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 1036-1073
Publication date 2013-04-01
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1071/HE12912
Open Access Status File (Author Post-print)
Volume 24
Issue 1
Start page 26
End page 31
Total pages 6
Place of publication Camperdown, NSW, Australia
Publisher Australian Health Promotion Association
Collection year 2014
Language eng
Formatted abstract
Issue addressed: This paper determined the test-retest reliability and criterion validity of a modified version of the Active Australia Survey (AAS) and whether these properties varied across participants' activity levels.

Methods: Participants (n≤63) responded to repeat administrations of the AAS and wore an accelerometer for 7 days. Analyses used Spearman's rho (rs,) or weighted kappa () and Bland-Altman methods. Variation in mean difference and 95% limits of agreement (LOA) across average levels of activity were tested by linear regression.

Results:
Reliability correlations (rs; 95% confidence intervals (CI)) for minutes per week ranged from 0.40 (0.16, 0.59) to 0.80 (0.68, 0.87). For days per week, the agreement (; 95% CI) between administrations ranged from 0.43 (0.34, 0.73) to 0.83 (0.61, 0.93). There was a small mean difference between administrations (-8.46 moderate-vigorous minutes per week); 95% LOA widened as participants' average activity levels increased. Validity correlations (rs; 95% CI) for minutes per week ranged from 0.50 (0.28, 0.66) to 0.61 (0.43, 0.75). For days per week, the agreement (; 95% CI) ranged from 0.35 (0.10, 0.50) to 0.61 (0.29, 0.87). The mean difference between the AAS and accelerometer and 95% LOA both varied with participants' activity levels.

Conclusions: The reliability and validity of the modified AAS were better than those of previously published versions, but varied according to participants' activity levels. So what? In this study, participants who engaged in more activity had more measurement error than less active participants. This proportionality will have important implications for cross-sectional and intervention studies. This phenomenon needs to be examined for other self-reported physical activity measures.
Keyword Measurement
Exercise
Accelerometer
Questionnaires
Surveillance
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Confirmed Code
Institutional Status UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collections: Official 2014 Collection
School of Public Health Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 7 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 7 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Sun, 26 May 2013, 11:36:46 EST by System User on behalf of School of Public Health