Chu Anne H Y, Ng Sheryl H X, Koh David, Müller-Riemenschneider Falk
Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore; PAPRSB Institute of Health Sciences, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Jalan Tungku Link, Gadong, Brunei Darussalam.
PLoS One. 2015 Sep 1;10(9):e0136944. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0136944. eCollection 2015.
The Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ) was originally designed to be interviewer-administered by the World Health Organization in assessing physical activity. The main aim of this study was to compare the psychometric properties of a self-administered GPAQ with the original interviewer-administered approach. Additionally, this study explored whether using different accelerometry-based physical activity bout definitions might affect the questionnaire's validity.
A total of 110 participants were recruited and randomly allocated to an interviewer- (n = 56) or a self-administered (n = 54) group for test-retest reliability, of which 108 participants who met the wear time criteria were included in the validity study. Reliability was assessed by administration of questionnaires twice with a one-week interval. Criterion validity was assessed by comparing against seven-day accelerometer measures. Two definitions for accelerometry-data scoring were employed: (1) total-min of activity, and (2) 10-min bout.
Participants had similar baseline characteristics in both administration groups and no significant difference was found between the two formats in terms of validity (correlations between the GPAQ and accelerometer). For validity, the GPAQ demonstrated fair-to-moderate correlations for moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) for self-administration (rs = 0.30) and interviewer-administration (rs = 0.46). Findings were similar when considering 10-min activity bouts in the accelerometer analysis for MVPA (rs = 0.29 vs. 0.42 for self vs. interviewer). Within each mode of administration, the strongest correlations were observed for vigorous-intensity activity. However, Bland-Altman plots illustrated bias toward overestimation for higher levels of MVPA, vigorous- and moderate-intensity activities, and underestimation for lower levels of these measures. Reliability for MVPA revealed moderate correlations (rs = 0.61 vs. 0.63 for self vs. interviewer).
Our findings showed comparability between both self- and interviewer-administration modes of the GPAQ. The GPAQ in general but especially the self-administered version may offer a relatively inexpensive method for measuring physical activity of various types and at different domains. However, there may be bias in the GPAQ measurements depending on the overall physical activity. It is advisable to incorporate accelerometers in future studies, particularly when measuring different intensities of physical activity.
全球体力活动问卷(GPAQ)最初由世界卫生组织设计,用于通过访谈者实施来评估体力活动。本研究的主要目的是比较自我实施的GPAQ与原始访谈者实施方式的心理测量特性。此外,本研究探讨了使用基于不同加速度计的体力活动时段定义是否会影响问卷的有效性。
共招募了110名参与者,并随机分配到访谈者组(n = 56)或自我实施组(n = 54)进行重测信度测试,其中108名符合佩戴时间标准的参与者被纳入效度研究。通过间隔一周两次发放问卷来评估信度。通过与七天加速度计测量结果进行比较来评估效标效度。采用了两种加速度计数据评分定义:(1)活动总分钟数,和(2)10分钟时段。
两个实施组的参与者基线特征相似,两种形式在效度方面(GPAQ与加速度计之间的相关性)未发现显著差异。就效度而言,GPAQ在自我实施(rs = 0.30)和访谈者实施(rs = 0.46)的中度至剧烈体力活动(MVPA)方面表现出中等程度的相关性。在加速度计分析MVPA时考虑10分钟活动时段时,结果相似(自我实施与访谈者实施分别为rs = 0.29对0.42)。在每种实施方式中,高强度活动的相关性最强。然而,布兰德-奥特曼图显示,对于较高水平的MVPA、高强度和中等强度活动存在高估偏差,而对于这些测量的较低水平存在低估偏差。MVPA的信度显示出中等程度的相关性(自我实施与访谈者实施分别为rs = 0.61对0.63)。
我们的研究结果表明GPAQ的自我实施和访谈者实施模式具有可比性。总体而言,尤其是自我实施版本的GPAQ可能为测量各种类型和不同领域的体力活动提供一种相对廉价的方法。然而,根据总体体力活动情况,GPAQ测量可能存在偏差。建议在未来研究中纳入加速度计,特别是在测量不同强度的体力活动时。