Faculty of Sport Sciences, Waseda University.
Faculty of Health and Sport Sciences, University of Tsukuba.
J Epidemiol. 2018 Mar 5;28(3):149-155. doi: 10.2188/jea.JE20170002. Epub 2017 Oct 28.
Good quality measures of Japanese adults' sedentary behaviors are needed to accurately assess correlates of specific sedentary behaviors. The present study assessed criterion validity of total sedentary behavior and test-retest reliability of six domain-specific sedentary behaviors.
We administered a questionnaire, based on previous studies, that measured domain-specific sedentary behaviors. To examine validity, agreement between self-reported time spent in sedentary behaviors from the questionnaire and objectively-measured sedentary time using accelerometers was compared among 392 adults (aged 40-64 years) in two Japanese cities. For reliability, a 2-week interval test-retest was administered to a convenience sample of 34 participants.
The correlation between total self-reported and objectively measured sedentary time was significant (all P < 0.001) and fair-to-good for workdays (ρ = 0.57) and whole week (ρ = 0.49), but was low for non-workdays (ρ = 0.23). The difference between the two measures was significant for whole week (z = -2.25, P = 0.03) and non-workdays (z = -5.50, P < 0.001), but was not significant for workdays (z = -0.60, P = 0.55). There was a significant positive association between the difference in the two measures and the average of these two measures (workdays: r = 0.53; non-workdays: r = 0.45; and whole week: r = 0.54, all P < 0.001). There was fair-to-good test-retest reliability of total sedentary time for each domain (workdays: interclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.77, non-workdays: ICC = 0.53, and whole week: ICC = 0.7; all P < 0.01).
The scale of domain-specific sedentary behaviors is reliable for estimating where and for what purpose Japanese adults spend their sedentary time, and total sedentary time is valid for workdays and the whole week.
为了准确评估特定久坐行为的相关性，需要高质量的日本成年人久坐行为衡量标准。本研究评估了总久坐行为的效标效度和六个特定领域久坐行为的重测信度。
我们根据先前的研究制定了一份问卷，该问卷测量了特定领域的久坐行为。为了检验有效性，我们比较了来自两个日本城市的 392 名（年龄在 40-64 岁之间）成年人自我报告的问卷中久坐时间和使用加速度计客观测量的久坐时间之间的一致性。为了检验可靠性，对一个方便样本的 34 名参与者进行了为期两周的重测。
总自我报告和客观测量的久坐时间之间的相关性是显著的（所有 P<0.001），且在工作日（ρ=0.57）和整个星期（ρ=0.49）上是良好到中等的，但在非工作日（ρ=0.23）上则较低。两种测量方法之间的差异在整个星期（z=-2.25，P=0.03）和非工作日（z=-5.50，P<0.001）上是显著的，但在工作日（z=-0.60，P=0.55）上则不显著。两种测量方法之间的差异与这两种方法的平均值之间存在显著的正相关（工作日：r=0.53；非工作日：r=0.45；整个星期：r=0.54，均 P<0.001）。每个领域的总久坐时间的重测信度均良好（工作日：组内相关系数 [ICC] = 0.77，非工作日：ICC = 0.53，整个星期：ICC = 0.7；均 P<0.01）。
特定领域久坐行为量表可靠地估计了日本成年人在哪里以及为何目的花费他们的久坐时间，总久坐时间在工作日和整个星期都有效。
