协调测量工具：比较日常活动行为问卷与活动记录仪的同时效度，以评估成年人的24小时运动行为。

Harmonizing measurement tools: examining the concurrent validity of the Daily Activity Behaviors Questionnaire compared to the ActiGraph to assess 24-hour movement behaviors among adults.

作者信息

Willems Iris, Verbestel Vera, Dumuid Dorothea, Calders Patrick, Lapauw Bruno, De Craemer Marieke

机构信息

Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.

Research Foundation Flanders, Brussels, Belgium.

出版信息

BMC Public Health. 2024 Dec 30;24(1):3607. doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-21139-8.

DOI:10.1186/s12889-024-21139-8

PMID:39736604

原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11684262/

Abstract

PURPOSE

An accurate assessment of time spent in 24-hour movement behaviors (24 h-MBs) is crucial in exploring health related associations. This study aims to evaluate the concurrent validity of the Daily Activity Behavior Questionnaire (DABQ) compared to the ActiGraph using absolute and relative indicators of validity.

METHODS

This cross-sectional observational study included 105 adults (45 ± 13 y/o, 54% female). Participants wore an ActiGraph during seven consecutive days followed by filling in the DABQ recalling the past seven days. Intraclass correlations (95% confidence intervals), Bland-Altman plots, Spearman's correlations and the magnitude of error were calculated to estimate the absolute agreement and validity. Interaction effects between sociodemographic variables and the measurement methods were explored in mixed models. All analyses were compared by four commonly used data processing methods for ActiGraph data (cut-points and data reduction method-specific).

RESULTS

Moderate absolute agreement (ICC = 0.56) and validity (rho=0.58) was found for sleep comparing the DABQ with the ActiGraph. Time spent in sedentary behavior (SB), light physical activity (LPA) and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) showed poor absolute agreement (ICC: 0.01-0.38, ICC: 0.00-0.31; ICC: 0.23-0.30) and validity (rho: 0.01-0.43, rho: 0.10-0.46; rho: 0.38-0.44) comparing the DABQ with the ActiGraph. The Ranges in ICC and Spearmans' rho include the comparison between the four data processing methods. A significant interaction was found between the measurement method and educational level (p < 0.001), in specific for sleep, SB and LPA.

CONCLUSION

Compared to the ActiGraph, the DABQ showed accurate time-use estimates for sleep but presented poor to moderate evidence of validity regarding SB, LPA and MVPA. This was shown in underestimations regarding SB and MVPA, and overestimations regarding LPA. However, educational level and data processing methods contributed to these variations.

摘要

目的

准确评估24小时运动行为（24 h-MBs）所花费的时间对于探索与健康相关的关联至关重要。本研究旨在使用效度的绝对指标和相对指标，评估日常活动行为问卷（DABQ）与ActiGraph相比的同时效度。

方法

这项横断面观察性研究纳入了105名成年人（45±13岁，54%为女性）。参与者连续七天佩戴ActiGraph，随后填写DABQ，回忆过去七天的情况。计算组内相关性（95%置信区间）、Bland-Altman图、Spearman相关性和误差幅度，以估计绝对一致性和效度。在混合模型中探索社会人口统计学变量与测量方法之间的交互作用。所有分析均通过四种常用的ActiGraph数据处理方法（切点和特定的数据简化方法）进行比较。

结果

将DABQ与ActiGraph相比，睡眠方面发现了中等程度的绝对一致性（ICC = 0.56）和效度（rho = 0.58）。久坐行为（SB）、轻度身体活动（LPA）和中度至剧烈身体活动（MVPA）所花费的时间显示出较差的绝对一致性（ICC：0.01 - 0.38，ICC：0.00 - 0.31；ICC：0.23 - 0.30）和效度（rho：0.01 - 0.43，rho：0.10 - 0.46；rho：0.38 - 0.44），将DABQ与ActiGraph相比。ICC和Spearman's rho的范围包括四种数据处理方法之间的比较。在测量方法和教育水平之间发现了显著的交互作用（p < 0.001），特别是在睡眠、SB和LPA方面。