The University of Queensland, School of Population Health, Cancer Prevention Research Centre, Brisbane, Australia.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2013 Jun;45(6):1198-207. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3182837f57.
Past-day recall rather than recall of past week or a usual/typical day may improve the validity of self-reported sedentary time measures. This study examined the test-retest reliability, criterion validity, and responsiveness of the seven-item questionnaire, Past-day Adults' Sedentary Time (PAST).
Participants (breast cancer survivors, n = 90, age = 33-75 yr, body mass index = 25-40 kg·m) in a 6-month randomized controlled trial of a lifestyle-based weight loss intervention completed the interviewer-administered PAST questionnaire about time spent sitting/lying on the previous day for work, transport, television viewing, nonwork computer use, reading, hobbies, and other purposes (summed for total sedentary time). The instrument was administered at baseline, 7 d later for test-retest reliability (n = 86), and at follow-up. ActivPAL3-assessed sit/lie time in bouts of ≥5 min during waking hours on the recall day was used as the validity criterion measure at both baseline (n = 72) and follow-up (n = 68). Analyses included intraclass correlation coefficients, Pearson's correlations (r), and Bland-Altman plots and responsiveness index.
The PAST had fair to good test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.32-0.64). At baseline, the correlation between PAST and activPAL sit/lie time was r = 0.57 (95% CI = 0.39-0.71). The mean difference between PAST at baseline and retest was -25 min (5.2%), 95% limits of agreement = -5.9 to 5.0 h, and the activPAL sit/lie time was -9 min (1.8%), 95% limits of agreement = -4.9 to 4.6 h. The PAST showed small but significant responsiveness (-0.44, 95% CI = -0.92 to -0.04); responsiveness of activPAL sit/lie time was not significant.
The PAST questionnaire provided an easy-to-administer measure of sedentary time in this sample. Validity and reliability findings compare favorably with other sedentary time questionnaires. Past-day recall of sedentary time shows promise for use in future health behavior, epidemiological, and population surveillance studies.
相较于回顾过去一周或典型一天的时间，回顾过去一天的时间可能会提高自我报告的久坐时间测量的有效性。本研究旨在检验七项问卷过去一天成人久坐时间（PAST）的重测信度、效标效度和反应度。
在一项为期 6 个月的生活方式为基础的减肥干预随机对照试验中，90 名参与者（乳腺癌幸存者，年龄 33-75 岁，BMI 为 25-40 kg·m）完成了由调查员管理的 PAST 问卷，问卷内容为前一天因工作、交通、看电视、非工作用电脑、阅读、爱好和其他目的而坐着/躺着的时间（总计为久坐时间）。该工具在基线时、7 天后（重测信度，n = 86）和随访时进行了管理。在回忆日，在清醒时间内以 ≥5 分钟为一个时间段记录的 ActivPAL3 评估的坐/躺时间作为两个时间点（基线，n = 72；随访，n = 68）的有效性标准测量。分析包括组内相关系数、皮尔逊相关系数（r）、Bland-Altman 图和反应度指数。
PAST 具有良好的重测信度（组内相关系数 = 0.50，95%置信区间 [CI] = 0.32-0.64）。在基线时，PAST 与 ActivPAL 坐/躺时间的相关性为 r = 0.57（95% CI = 0.39-0.71）。PAST 在基线和重测之间的平均差异为 -25 分钟（5.2%），95%一致性界限= -5.9 至 5.0 小时，ActivPAL 的坐/躺时间为 -9 分钟（1.8%），95%一致性界限= -4.9 至 4.6 小时。PAST 显示出较小但有统计学意义的反应度（-0.44，95% CI = -0.92 至 -0.04）；ActivPAL 坐/躺时间的反应度不显著。
在该样本中，PAST 问卷提供了一种易于管理的久坐时间测量方法。有效性和可靠性的发现与其他久坐时间问卷相当。过去一天的久坐时间回顾有望用于未来的健康行为、流行病学和人群监测研究。
