• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

两种简短的初级保健身体活动问卷在诊所工作人员中与加速度计测量结果的效度。

Validity of two brief primary care physical activity questionnaires with accelerometry in clinic staff.

作者信息

Ball Trever J, Joy Elizabeth A, Goh Tan L, Hannon James C, Gren Lisa H, Shaw Janet M

机构信息

1Department of Exercise and Sport Science,University of Utah,Salt Lake City,UT,USA.

2Department of Family and Preventive Medicine,University of Utah,Salt Lake City,UT,USA.

出版信息

Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2015 Jan;16(1):100-8. doi: 10.1017/S1463423613000479. Epub 2014 Jan 28.

DOI:10.1017/S1463423613000479
PMID:24472569
Abstract

BACKGROUND

To date, no physical activity (PA) questionnaires intended for primary care have been compared against a criterion measure of PA and current (2008) aerobic PA recommendations of the American College of Sports Medicine/American Heart Association (ACSM/AHA).

AIM

This study evaluated preliminary evidence for criterion validity of two brief (<1 min) PA questionnaires with accelerometry, and their ability to identify if individuals meet ACSM/AHA PA recommendations.

METHODS

45 health clinic staff wore an accelerometer for seven consecutive days and afterwards completed two brief PA questionnaires, the Physical Activity Vital Sign (PAVS), and the Speedy Nutrition and Physical Activity Assessment (SNAP). Agreement and descriptive statistics were calculated between the PAVS or SNAP and accelerometry in order to measure each questionnaire's ability to quantify the number of days participants achieved ⩾ 30 min of moderate-vigorous PA (MVPA) performed in bouts of ⩾ 10 continuous minutes. Participants with <5 days of ⩾ 30 bout-min of MVPA were considered insufficiently active according to PA recommendations.

FINDINGS

There was a significant positive correlation between number of days with ⩾ 30 bout-min MVPA and the PAVS (r = 0.52, P < 0.001), and SNAP ( r= 0.31, P < 0.05). The PAVS had moderate agreement with accelerometry for identifying if individuals met or did not meet PA recommendations (κ = 0.46, P < 0.001), whereas SNAP had poor agreement (κ = 0.12, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides preliminary evidence of criterion validity of the PAVS and SNAP with accelerometry and agreement identifying if respondents meet current (2008) ACSM/AHA aerobic PA recommendations. The PAVS and SNAP should be evaluated further for repeatability, and in populations varying in PA levels, age, gender, and ethnicity.

摘要

背景

迄今为止,尚无用于初级保健的体力活动(PA)问卷与PA的标准测量方法以及美国运动医学学院/美国心脏协会(ACSM/AHA)当前(2008年)的有氧PA建议进行比较。

目的

本研究评估了两份简短(<1分钟)PA问卷与加速度计的标准效度的初步证据,以及它们识别个体是否符合ACSM/AHA PA建议的能力。

方法

45名健康诊所工作人员连续七天佩戴加速度计,之后完成两份简短的PA问卷,即体力活动生命体征(PAVS)和快速营养与体力活动评估(SNAP)。计算PAVS或SNAP与加速度计之间的一致性和描述性统计量,以衡量每份问卷量化参与者在持续时间≥10分钟的时段内达到≥30分钟中等至剧烈PA(MVPA)天数的能力。根据PA建议,MVPA<5天且时长≥30分钟的参与者被视为体力活动不足。

结果

MVPA≥30分钟时段的天数与PAVS(r = 0.52,P < 0.001)和SNAP(r = 0.31,P < .05)之间存在显著正相关。PAVS与加速度计在识别个体是否符合PA建议方面具有中等一致性(κ = 0.46,P < 0.001),而SNAP的一致性较差(κ = 0.12,P < 0.05)。

结论

本研究提供了PAVS和SNAP与加速度计的标准效度以及识别受访者是否符合当前(2008年)ACSM/AHA有氧PA建议的一致性的初步证据。应进一步评估PAVS和SNAP的可重复性,以及在PA水平、年龄、性别和种族不同的人群中的适用性。

相似文献

1
Validity of two brief primary care physical activity questionnaires with accelerometry in clinic staff.两种简短的初级保健身体活动问卷在诊所工作人员中与加速度计测量结果的效度。
Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2015 Jan;16(1):100-8. doi: 10.1017/S1463423613000479. Epub 2014 Jan 28.
2
Concurrent Validity of a Self-Reported Physical Activity "Vital Sign" Questionnaire With Adult Primary Care Patients.自我报告的身体活动“生命体征”问卷与成年初级保健患者的同时效度
Prev Chronic Dis. 2016 Feb 4;13:E16. doi: 10.5888/pcd13.150228.
3
Criterion Validity and Reliability of 2 Brief Physical Activity Questionnaires in Ethnically Diverse Adults.两个简短的体力活动问卷在不同种族成年人中的效标效度和信度。
J Phys Act Health. 2024 Jun 7;21(8):787-793. doi: 10.1123/jpah.2023-0697. Print 2024 Aug 1.
4
Accelerometer Validation of Questionnaires Used in Clinical Settings to Assess MVPA.用于临床环境中评估中等至剧烈身体活动(MVPA)的问卷的加速度计验证
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2015 Jul;47(7):1538-42. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000565.
5
Validity of two brief physical activity questionnaires with accelerometers among African-American women.两种简短体力活动问卷在非裔美国女性中与加速度计测量结果的效度
Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2016 May;17(3):265-76. doi: 10.1017/S1463423615000390. Epub 2015 Jul 16.
6
Screening Physical Activity in Family Practice: Validity of the Spanish Version of a Brief Physical Activity Questionnaire.家庭医疗中的身体活动筛查:简易身体活动问卷西班牙语版的效度
PLoS One. 2015 Sep 17;10(9):e0136870. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0136870. eCollection 2015.
7
Reliability and Validity of the Self- and Interviewer-Administered Versions of the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ).全球体力活动问卷(GPAQ)自我施测版和访谈员施测版的信度与效度
PLoS One. 2015 Sep 1;10(9):e0136944. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0136944. eCollection 2015.
8
A Review of Current Literature on Vital Sign Assessment of Physical Activity in Primary Care.关于初级保健中体力活动生命体征评估的当前文献综述。
J Nurs Scholarsh. 2018 Jan;50(1):65-73. doi: 10.1111/jnu.12351. Epub 2017 Oct 25.
9
Can a single question provide an accurate measure of physical activity?一个问题能否提供准确的身体活动测量?
Br J Sports Med. 2013 Jan;47(1):44-8. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2011-090899. Epub 2012 Apr 20.
10
Criterion-related validity of the last 7-day, short form of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire in Swedish adults.瑞典成年人中国际体力活动问卷7天简短版的效标关联效度
Public Health Nutr. 2006 Apr;9(2):258-65. doi: 10.1079/phn2005840.

引用本文的文献

1
Association between physical activity, performance scores, and clinical trial enrollment in cancer survivors.癌症幸存者的体力活动、表现评分与临床试验入组之间的关联。
BMC Cancer. 2025 Aug 26;25(1):1377. doi: 10.1186/s12885-025-14820-7.
2
Differences in Long COVID severity by duration of illness, symptom evolution, and vaccination: a longitudinal cohort study from the INSPIRE group.长新冠严重程度在疾病持续时间、症状演变和疫苗接种方面的差异:来自INSPIRE小组的一项纵向队列研究。
Lancet Reg Health Am. 2025 Feb 14;44:101026. doi: 10.1016/j.lana.2025.101026. eCollection 2025 Apr.
3
mHealth Gratitude Exercise Mindfulness App for Resiliency Among Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Staff: Three-Arm Pretest-Posttest Interventional Study.
移动医疗感恩练习正念应用程序对新生儿重症监护病房工作人员的适应力的影响:三臂前后测试干预研究。
JMIR Nurs. 2024 Feb 16;7:e54561. doi: 10.2196/54561.
4
Incorporating Physical Activity Assessments and Behavior Change Techniques Into Geriatrics.将身体活动评估和行为改变技术纳入老年医学
Arch Rehabil Res Clin Transl. 2023 Aug 20;5(4):100293. doi: 10.1016/j.arrct.2023.100293. eCollection 2023 Dec.
5
Tools to guide clinical discussions on physical activity, sedentary behaviour, and/or sleep for health promotion between primary care providers and adults accessing care: a scoping review.用于指导初级保健提供者与寻求护理的成年人之间进行关于促进健康的身体活动、久坐行为和/或睡眠的临床讨论的工具:范围综述。
BMC Prim Care. 2023 Jul 7;24(1):140. doi: 10.1186/s12875-023-02091-9.
6
The Compatibility of Children with Obesity to Self-Report Aspects of Physical Activity Domains.肥胖儿童对身体活动领域自我报告方面的适应性
Children (Basel). 2022 Oct 31;9(11):1664. doi: 10.3390/children9111664.
7
Evaluation of Electronic and Pen-and-Paper Formats of the Inventory of Physical Activity Barriers: A Randomized Crossover Study.评估体力活动障碍清单的电子格式和纸笔格式:一项随机交叉研究。
J Phys Act Health. 2022 Jul 7;19(8):540-547. doi: 10.1123/jpah.2021-0821. Print 2022 Aug 1.
8
The Inventory of Physical Activity Barriers for Adults 50 Years and Older: Refinement and Validation.成人 50 岁及以上身体活动障碍清单:修订和验证。
Gerontologist. 2022 Nov 30;62(10):e555-e563. doi: 10.1093/geront/gnab165.
9
Osteoarthritis physical activity care pathway (OA-PCP): results of a feasibility trial.骨关节炎体力活动护理途径(OA-PCP):一项可行性试验的结果。
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2020 May 16;21(1):308. doi: 10.1186/s12891-020-03339-6.
10
Testing the cross-stressor hypothesis under real-world conditions: exercise as a moderator of the association between momentary anxiety and cardiovascular responses.在现实条件下检验跨应激假说:运动作为瞬时焦虑与心血管反应之间关联的调节因素。
J Behav Med. 2020 Dec;43(6):989-1001. doi: 10.1007/s10865-020-00155-0. Epub 2020 Apr 22.