使用国际体力活动问卷评估久坐行为。
Assessment of sedentary behavior with the International Physical Activity Questionnaire.
作者信息
Rosenberg Dori E, Bull Fiona C, Marshall Alison L, Sallis James F, Bauman Adrian E
机构信息
Joint Doctoral Program in Clinical Psychology, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA 92182, USA.
出版信息
J Phys Act Health. 2008;5 Suppl 1:S30-44. doi: 10.1123/jpah.5.s1.s30.
PURPOSE
This study explored definitions of sedentary behavior and examined the relationship between sitting time and physical inactivity using the sitting items from the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ).
METHODS
Participants (N = 289, 44.6% male, mean age = 35.93) from 3 countries completed self-administered long- and short-IPAQ sitting items. Participants wore accelerometers; were classified as inactive (no leisure-time activity), insufficiently active, or meeting recommendations; and were classified into tertiles of sitting behavior.
RESULTS
Reliability of sitting time was acceptable for men and women. Correlations between total sitting and accelerometer counts/min <100 were significant for both long (r = .33) and short (r = .34) forms. There was no agreement between tertiles of sitting and the inactivity category (kappa = .02, P = .68).
CONCLUSION
Sedentary behavior should be explicitly measured in population surveillance and research instead of being defined by lack of physical activity.
目的
本研究探讨了久坐行为的定义，并使用国际体力活动问卷（IPAQ）中的久坐项目检验了久坐时间与身体活动不足之间的关系。
方法
来自3个国家的参与者（N = 289，男性占44.6%，平均年龄 = 35.93岁）完成了自我填写的IPAQ长表和短表中的久坐项目。参与者佩戴了加速度计；被分为不活动（无休闲时间活动）、活动不足或达到建议水平；并被分为久坐行为三分位数。
结果
久坐时间的可靠性对男性和女性来说是可接受的。长表（r = .33）和短表（r = .34）中，总久坐时间与加速度计计数/分钟<100之间的相关性均显著。久坐三分位数与不活动类别之间没有一致性（kappa = .02，P = .68）。
结论
在人群监测和研究中，应明确测量久坐行为，而不是通过缺乏身体活动来定义。
Zotero 插件