Comparison of surveys used to measure physical activity

被引:145
作者
Brown, W [1 ]
Bauman, A
Chey, T
Trost, S
Mummery, K
机构
[1] Univ Queensland, Sch Human Movement Studies, St Lucia, Qld 4072, Australia
[2] Univ New S Wales, Sch Publ Hlth & Community Med, Kensington, NSW 2033, Australia
关键词
D O I
10.1111/j.1467-842X.2004.tb00925.x
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Objective: To compare the level of agreement in results obtained from four physical activity (PA) measurement instruments that are in use in Australia and around the world. Methods: 1,280 randomly selected participants answered two sets of PA questions by telephone. 428 answered the Active Australia (AA) and National Health Surveys, 427 answered the AA and CDC Behavioural Risk Factor Surveillance System surveys (BRFSS), and 425 answered the AA survey and the short International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ). Results: Among the three pairs of survey items, the difference in mean total PA time was lowest when the AA and NHS items were asked (difference=24) (SE:17) minutes, compared with 144 (SE:21) mins for AA/BRFSS and 406 (SE:27) mins for AA/IPAQ). Correspondingly, prevalence estimates for 'sufficiently active' were similar for AA and NHS (56% and 55% respectively), but about 10% higher when BRFSS data were used, and about 26% higher when the IPAQ items were used, compared with estimates from the AA survey. Conclusions: The findings clearly demonstrate that there are large differences in reported PA times and hence in prevalence estimates of 'sufficient activity' from these four measures. Implications: It is important to consistently use the same survey for population monitoring purposes. As the AA survey has now been used three times in national surveys, its continued use for population surveys is recommended so that trend data ever a longer period of time can be established.
引用
收藏
页码:128 / 134
页数:7
相关论文
共 11 条
  • [1] Compendium of Physical Activities: an update of activity codes and MET intensities
    Ainsworth, BE
    Haskell, WL
    Whitt, MC
    Irwin, ML
    Swartz, AM
    Strath, SJ
    O'Brien, WL
    Bassett, DR
    Schmitz, KH
    Emplaincourt, PO
    Jacobs, DR
    Leon, AS
    [J]. MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2000, 32 (09) : S498 - S516
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2002, AUSTRALASIAN EPIDEMI
  • [3] ARMSTRONG T, 2000, 10 AIHW CVD
  • [4] *AUSTR I HLTH WELF, 2003, PHYS ACT PATT QUEENS
  • [5] STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
    BLAND, JM
    ALTMAN, DG
    [J]. LANCET, 1986, 1 (8476) : 307 - 310
  • [6] *CANB ACT COMM DEP, 1999, NAT PHYS ACT GUID
  • [7] A COEFFICIENT OF AGREEMENT FOR NOMINAL SCALES
    COHEN, J
    [J]. EDUCATIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 1960, 20 (01) : 37 - 46
  • [8] International physical activity questionnaire:: 12-country reliability and validity
    Craig, CL
    Marshall, AL
    Sjöström, M
    Bauman, AE
    Booth, ML
    Ainsworth, BE
    Pratt, M
    Ekelund, U
    Yngve, A
    Sallis, JF
    Oja, P
    [J]. MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2003, 35 (08) : 1381 - 1395
  • [9] Public health surveillance of physical activity
    Macera, CA
    Pratt, M
    [J]. RESEARCH QUARTERLY FOR EXERCISE AND SPORT, 2000, 71 (02) : S97 - S103
  • [10] *US DEP HHS, 1996, PHYS ACT HLTH REP