Active adults recall their physical activity differently to less active adults: test–retest reliability and validity of a physical activity survey
Brianna S. Fjeldsoe A C , Elisabeth A. H. Winkler A , Alison L. Marshall B , Elizabeth G. Eakin A and Marina M. Reeves AA The University of Queensland, School of Population Health, Cancer Prevention Research Centre, Herston Road, Herston, Qld 4006, Australia.
B Queensland University of Technology, School of Public Health, Herston Road, Kelvin Grove, Qld 4059, Australia.
C Corresponding author. Email: b.fjeldsoe@sph.uq.edu.au
Health Promotion Journal of Australia 24(1) 26-31 https://doi.org/10.1071/HE12912
Submitted: 7 August 2012 Accepted: 15 November 2012 Published: 27 March 2013
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 (κ) 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 (κ; 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 (κ; 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.
Keywords: measurement, exercise, accelerometer, questionnaires, surveillance.
References
[1] Haskell WL, Lee IM, Pate RR, Powell KE, Blair SN, Franklin BA, Macera CA, Heath GW, Thompson PD, Bauman A (2007) Physical activity and public health: updated recommendation for adults from the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association. Med Sci Sports Exerc 39, 1423–34.| Physical activity and public health: updated recommendation for adults from the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 17762377PubMed |
[2] Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). Australia’s health 2010. Australia’s health series no. 12. Catalogue no. Aus 122. Canberra: AIHW 2010.
[3] US Department of Health and Human Services. 2008 Physical activity guidelines for Americans (p. 76). Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office; 2008.
[4] World Health Organization (WHO). Global strategy on diet, physical activity and health: report by the Secretariat. Geneva: WHO; 2004.
[5] Sallis JF, Saelens BE (2000) Assessment of physical activity by self-report: status, limitations and future directions. Res Q Exerc Sport 71, S1–14.
[6] Hagströmer M, Troiano RP, Sjostrom M, Berrigan D (2010) Levels and patterns of objectively assessed physical activity- a comparison between Sweden and the United States. Am J Epidemiol 171, 1055–64.
| Levels and patterns of objectively assessed physical activity- a comparison between Sweden and the United States.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 20406758PubMed |
[7] Troiano RP, Berrigan D, Dodd KW, Masse LC, Tilert T, McDowell M (2008) Physical activity in the United States measured by accelerometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc 40, 181–8.
[8] Craig R, Mindell J, Hirani V. Health survey for England 2008: pysical activity and fitness (p. 395). London: The NHS Information Centre for Health and Social Care; 2009.
[9] Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). The Active Australia survey: a guide and manual for implementation, analysis and reporting. Canberra: AIHW; 2003.
[10] Bauman A, Ford I, Armstrong T. Trends in population levels of reported physical activity in Australia 1997, 1999 and 2000. Canberra: Australian Sports Commission; 2001.
[11] Queensland Health and Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). Physical activity patterns of Queensland adults. Brisbane: Queensland Health and AIHW; 2003.
[12] Brown WJ, Burton NW, Marshall AL, Miller YD (2008) Reliability and validity of a modified self-administered version of the Active Australia physical activity survey in a sample of mid-age women. Aust N Z J Public Health 32, 535–41.
| Reliability and validity of a modified self-administered version of the Active Australia physical activity survey in a sample of mid-age women.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 19076744PubMed |
[13] Reeves MM, Marshall AL, Owen N, Winkler EA, Eakin EG (2010) Measuring physical activity change in broad-reach intervention trials. J Phys Act Health 7, 194–202.
[14] Eakin E, Reeves M, Lawler S, Graves N, Oldenburg B, Del Mar C, Wilke K, Winkler E, Barnett A (2009) Telephone counseling for physical activity and diet in primary care patients. Am J Prev Med 36, 142–9.
| Telephone counseling for physical activity and diet in primary care patients.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 19062240PubMed |
[15] Hawkes AL, Atherton J, Taylor CB, Scuffham P, Eadie K, Miller NH, Oldenberg B (2009) Randomised controlled trial of a secondary prevention program for myocardial infarction patients (‘Proactive Heart’): study protocol. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 9, 16
| Randomised controlled trial of a secondary prevention program for myocardial infarction patients (‘Proactive Heart’): study protocol.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 19426524PubMed |
[16] Timperio A, Salmon J, Crawford D (2003) Validity and reliability of a physical activity recall instrument among overweight and non-overweight men and women. J Sci Med Sport 6, 477–91.
| Validity and reliability of a physical activity recall instrument among overweight and non-overweight men and women.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD2c%2FisVelsQ%3D%3D&md5=4b38046d346ad3b5296745e093b64192CAS | 14723397PubMed |
[17] Brown WJ, Trost SG, Bauman A, Mummery K, Owen N (2004) Test–retest reliability of four physical activity measures used in population surveys. J Sci Med Sport 7, 205–15.
| Test–retest reliability of four physical activity measures used in population surveys.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD2cvlsVeitg%3D%3D&md5=0d96511133c168c341631e2540c5103fCAS | 15362316PubMed |
[18] Pettee Gabriel K, McClain JJ, Lee CD, Swan PD, Alvar BA, Mitros MR, Ainsworth BE (2009) Evaluation of physical activity measures used in middle-aged women. Med Sci Sports Exerc 41, 1403–12.
| Evaluation of physical activity measures used in middle-aged women.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 19516161PubMed |
[19] Timperio A, Salmon J, Rosenberg M, Bull F (2004) Do logbooks influence recall of physical activity in validation studies? Med Sci Sports Exerc 36, 1181–6.
| Do logbooks influence recall of physical activity in validation studies?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 15235322PubMed |
[20] Brown W, Bauman A, Chey T, Trost S, Mummery K (2004) Comparison of surveys used to measure physical activity. Aust N Z J Public Health 28, 128–34.
| Comparison of surveys used to measure physical activity.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 15233351PubMed |
[21] Trost SG, Mciver KL, Pate RR (2005) Conducting accelerometer-based activity assessments in field-based research. Med Sci Sports Exerc 37, S531–43.
| Conducting accelerometer-based activity assessments in field-based research.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 16294116PubMed |
[22] US Department of Health and Human Services. NHANES 2003–2004 data documentation exam component: physical activity monitor (paxraw_c). Hyattsville, MD: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2006. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhanes/nhanes_03_04/paxraw_c.pdf [Verified October 2009].
[23] Freedson PS, Melanson E, Sirard J (1998) Calibration of the Computer Science and Applications, Inc. accelerometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc 30, 777–81.
| Calibration of the Computer Science and Applications, Inc. accelerometer.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DyaK1c3kvVSgtQ%3D%3D&md5=82670edd6932dee2aef7718c8f0999a4CAS | 9588623PubMed |
[24] Bland JM, Altman DG (1999) Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res 8, 135–60.
| Measuring agreement in method comparison studies.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DyaK1MvivFOmug%3D%3D&md5=f5cf53cb67050246c04202da43e26258CAS | 10501650PubMed |
[25] Brown R, Richmond S (2005) An update on the analysis of agreement for orthodontic indices. Eur J Orthod 27, 286–91.
| An update on the analysis of agreement for orthodontic indices.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 15947229PubMed |
[26] Yore MM, Ham SA, Ainsworth BE, Kruger J, Reis JP, Kohl HW Yore MM, Ham SA, Ainsworth BE, Kruger J, Reis JP, Kohl HW (2007) Reliability and validity of the instrument used in BRFSS to assess physical activity. Med Sci Sports Exerc 39, 1267–74.
| Reliability and validity of the instrument used in BRFSS to assess physical activity.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 17762359PubMed |
[27] Craig CL, Marshall AL, Sjöström M, Bauman AE, Booth ML, Ainsworth BE, Pratt M, Ekelund U, Yngve A, Sallis JF, Oja P (2003) International Physical Activity Questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. Med Sci Sports Exerc 35, 1381–95.
| International Physical Activity Questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 12900694PubMed |
[28] Bland JM, Altman DG (2003) Applying the right statistics: analyses of measurement studies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 22, 85–93.
| Applying the right statistics: analyses of measurement studies.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3szivVKrsA%3D%3D&md5=612fd99d6b9e4223280cc6eb831123eeCAS | 12858311PubMed |