Validity, reliability, and readability of single-item and short physical activity questionnaires for use in surveillance: A systematic review

被引:0
作者
Tcymbal, Antonina [1 ]
Messing, Sven [1 ]
Mait, Rachel [1 ]
Perez, Roberto Galindo [1 ]
Akter, Taiyeba [1 ]
Rakovac, Ivo [2 ]
Gelius, Peter [3 ]
Abu-Omar, Karim [1 ]
机构
[1] Friedrich Alexander Univ Erlangen Nurnberg, Dept Sport Sci & Sport, Erlangen, Germany
[2] World Hlth Org, Reg Off Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark
[3] Univ Lausanne, Inst Sport Sci, Lausanne, Switzerland
来源
PLOS ONE | 2024年 / 19卷 / 03期
关键词
HEALTH LITERACY; L-CAT; VALIDATION; ADULTS; POPULATION; TOOLS;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0300003
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Background Accurate and fast measurement of physical activity is important for surveillance. Even though many physical activity questionnaires (PAQ) are currently used in research, it is unclear which of them is the most reliable, valid, and easy to use. This systematic review aimed to identify existing brief PAQs, describe and compare their measurement properties, and assess their level of readability.Methods We performed a systematic review based on the PRISMA statement. Literature searches were conducted in six scientific databases. Articles were included if they evaluated validity and/or reliability of brief (i.e., with a maximum of three questions) physical activity or exercise questionnaires intended for healthy adults. Due to the heterogeneity of studies, data were summarized narratively. The level of readability was calculated according to the Flesch-Kincaid formula.Results In total, 35 articles published in English or Spanish were included, evaluating 32 distinct brief PAQs. The studies indicated moderate to good levels of reliability for the PAQs. However, the majority of results showed weak validity when validated against device-based measurements and demonstrated weak to moderate validity when validated against other PAQs. Most of the assessed PAQs met the criterion of being "short," allowing respondents to complete them in less than one minute either by themselves or with an interviewer. However, only 17 questionnaires had a readability level that indicates that the PAQ is easy to understand for the majority of the population.Conclusions This review identified a variety of brief PAQs, but most of them were evaluated in only a single study. Validity and reliability of short and long questionnaires are found to be at a comparable level, short PAQs can be recommended for use in surveillance systems. However, the methods used to assess measurement properties varied widely across studies, limiting the comparability between different PAQs and making it challenging to identify a single tool as the most suitable. None of the evaluated brief PAQs allowed for the measurement of whether a person fulfills current WHO physical activity guidelines. Future development or adaptation of PAQs should prioritize readability as an important factor to enhance their usability.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 59 条
  • [41] COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures
    Prinsen, C. A. C.
    Mokkink, L. B.
    Bouter, L. M.
    Alonso, J.
    Patrick, D. L.
    de Vet, H. C. W.
    Terwee, C. B.
    [J]. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2018, 27 (05) : 1147 - 1157
  • [42] How to identify physical inactivity in Primary Care: Validation of the Catalan and Spanish versions of 2 short questionnaires
    Puig Ribera, Anna
    Pena Chimenis, Oscar
    Romaguera Bosch, Montserrat
    Duran Bellido, Eulalia
    Heras Tebar, Antonio
    Sola Gonfaus, Merce
    Sarmiento Cruz, Manuel
    Cid Cantarero, Amanda
    [J]. ATENCION PRIMARIA, 2012, 44 (08): : 485 - 493
  • [43] Screening Physical Activity in Family Practice: Validity of the Spanish Version of a Brief Physical Activity Questionnaire
    Puig-Ribera, Anna
    Martin-Cantera, Carlos
    Puigdomenech, Elisa
    Real, Jordi
    Romaguera, Montserrat
    Felix Magdalena-Belio, Jose
    Ignacio Recio-Rodriguez, Jose
    Rodriguez-Martin, Beatriz
    Soledad Arietaleanizbeaskoa, Maria
    Repiso-Gento, Irene
    Garcia-Ortiz, Luis
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2015, 10 (09):
  • [44] Response Burden and Questionnaire Length: Is Shorter Better? A Review and Meta-analysis
    Rolstad, Sindre
    Adler, John
    Ryden, Anna
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2011, 14 (08) : 1101 - 1108
  • [45] Validation of the Stanford Leisure-Time Activity Categorical Item (L-Cat) using armband activity monitor data
    Ross, K. M.
    Leahey, T. M.
    Kiernan, M.
    [J]. OBESITY SCIENCE & PRACTICE, 2018, 4 (03): : 276 - 282
  • [46] Sallis JF, 2000, RES Q EXERCISE SPORT, V71, pS1, DOI 10.1080/02701367.2000.11082780
  • [47] MEASURING PHYSICAL-ACTIVITY WITH A SINGLE QUESTION
    SCHECHTMAN, KB
    BARZILAI, B
    ROST, K
    FISHER, EB
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 1991, 81 (06) : 771 - 773
  • [48] Validity and Reliability of International Physical Activity Questionnaires for Adults across EU Countries: Systematic Review and Meta Analysis
    Sember, Vedrana
    Meh, Kaja
    Soric, Maroje
    Starc, Gregor
    Rocha, Paulo
    Jurak, Gregor
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH, 2020, 17 (19) : 1 - 23
  • [49] Screening for physical activity in family practice - Evaluation of two brief assessment tools
    Smith, BJ
    Marshall, AL
    Huang, N
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, 2005, 29 (04) : 256 - 264
  • [50] A systematic review of the physical activity assessment tools used in primary care
    Smith, Toby O.
    McKenna, Maire C.
    Salter, Charlotte
    Hardeman, Wendy
    Richardson, Kathryn
    Hillsdon, Melvyn
    Hughes, Carly A.
    Steel, Nicholas
    Jones, Andy P.
    [J]. FAMILY PRACTICE, 2017, 34 (04) : 384 - 391