Cargando…
Workplace Sitting Breaks Questionnaire (SITBRQ): an assessment of concurrent validity and test-retest reliability
BACKGROUND: Breaks in prolonged sitting may have beneficial cardiometabolic and musculoskeletal health outcomes. Desk-based work settings are an important environment to promote and support breaks in sitting time. However, few studies have reported the psychometric properties of self-report measures...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4289328/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25476788 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-1249 |
_version_ | 1782352094482661376 |
---|---|
author | Pedisic, Zeljko Bennie, Jason A Timperio, Anna F Crawford, David A Dunstan, David W Bauman, Adrian E Salmon, Jo |
author_facet | Pedisic, Zeljko Bennie, Jason A Timperio, Anna F Crawford, David A Dunstan, David W Bauman, Adrian E Salmon, Jo |
author_sort | Pedisic, Zeljko |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Breaks in prolonged sitting may have beneficial cardiometabolic and musculoskeletal health outcomes. Desk-based work settings are an important environment to promote and support breaks in sitting time. However, few studies have reported the psychometric properties of self-report measures to assess the frequency and duration of breaks from sitting. This study examined the concurrent validity and test-retest reliability of the Workplace Sitting Breaks Questionnaire (SITBRQ) designed to assess frequency and duration of breaks in sitting within desk-based work settings. METHODS: To assess the concurrent validity, a sample of 147 desk-based employees completed the SITBRQ and wore an Actigraph GT1M accelerometer for seven consecutive days. To establish test-retest reliability, SITBRQ was administered on two separate occasions 7–14 days apart to a separate sample of 96 desk-based employees. RESULTS: A low relative agreement with accelerometry (Spearman’s r = 0.24 [95% CI 0.07 - 0.40]) was determined for self-reported frequency, but not for the duration of sitting breaks (Spearman’s r = 0.05 [95% CI −0.12 - 0.22]). Adequate reliability was determined for both self-reported frequency (Spearman’s r = 0.71 [95% CI 0.59 - 0.79], Cohen’s kappa = 0.74 [95% CI 0.64 - 0.84]) and duration of sitting breaks (Spearman’s r = 0.59 [95% CI 0.45 - 0.71], Cohen’s kappa = 0.61 [95% CI 0.38 - 0.85]). CONCLUSION: SITBRQ may be used for assessment of the frequency of sitting breaks within desk-based work settings with validity and reliability similar to other self-reports in the field of sedentary behaviour research. However, until adequately improved and re-evaluated, it should not be used to collect data about the duration of breaks in sitting time. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2458-14-1249) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4289328 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-42893282015-01-11 Workplace Sitting Breaks Questionnaire (SITBRQ): an assessment of concurrent validity and test-retest reliability Pedisic, Zeljko Bennie, Jason A Timperio, Anna F Crawford, David A Dunstan, David W Bauman, Adrian E Salmon, Jo BMC Public Health Research Article BACKGROUND: Breaks in prolonged sitting may have beneficial cardiometabolic and musculoskeletal health outcomes. Desk-based work settings are an important environment to promote and support breaks in sitting time. However, few studies have reported the psychometric properties of self-report measures to assess the frequency and duration of breaks from sitting. This study examined the concurrent validity and test-retest reliability of the Workplace Sitting Breaks Questionnaire (SITBRQ) designed to assess frequency and duration of breaks in sitting within desk-based work settings. METHODS: To assess the concurrent validity, a sample of 147 desk-based employees completed the SITBRQ and wore an Actigraph GT1M accelerometer for seven consecutive days. To establish test-retest reliability, SITBRQ was administered on two separate occasions 7–14 days apart to a separate sample of 96 desk-based employees. RESULTS: A low relative agreement with accelerometry (Spearman’s r = 0.24 [95% CI 0.07 - 0.40]) was determined for self-reported frequency, but not for the duration of sitting breaks (Spearman’s r = 0.05 [95% CI −0.12 - 0.22]). Adequate reliability was determined for both self-reported frequency (Spearman’s r = 0.71 [95% CI 0.59 - 0.79], Cohen’s kappa = 0.74 [95% CI 0.64 - 0.84]) and duration of sitting breaks (Spearman’s r = 0.59 [95% CI 0.45 - 0.71], Cohen’s kappa = 0.61 [95% CI 0.38 - 0.85]). CONCLUSION: SITBRQ may be used for assessment of the frequency of sitting breaks within desk-based work settings with validity and reliability similar to other self-reports in the field of sedentary behaviour research. However, until adequately improved and re-evaluated, it should not be used to collect data about the duration of breaks in sitting time. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2458-14-1249) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2014-12-05 /pmc/articles/PMC4289328/ /pubmed/25476788 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-1249 Text en © Pedisic et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Pedisic, Zeljko Bennie, Jason A Timperio, Anna F Crawford, David A Dunstan, David W Bauman, Adrian E Salmon, Jo Workplace Sitting Breaks Questionnaire (SITBRQ): an assessment of concurrent validity and test-retest reliability |
title | Workplace Sitting Breaks Questionnaire (SITBRQ): an assessment of concurrent validity and test-retest reliability |
title_full | Workplace Sitting Breaks Questionnaire (SITBRQ): an assessment of concurrent validity and test-retest reliability |
title_fullStr | Workplace Sitting Breaks Questionnaire (SITBRQ): an assessment of concurrent validity and test-retest reliability |
title_full_unstemmed | Workplace Sitting Breaks Questionnaire (SITBRQ): an assessment of concurrent validity and test-retest reliability |
title_short | Workplace Sitting Breaks Questionnaire (SITBRQ): an assessment of concurrent validity and test-retest reliability |
title_sort | workplace sitting breaks questionnaire (sitbrq): an assessment of concurrent validity and test-retest reliability |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4289328/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25476788 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-1249 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pedisiczeljko workplacesittingbreaksquestionnairesitbrqanassessmentofconcurrentvalidityandtestretestreliability AT benniejasona workplacesittingbreaksquestionnairesitbrqanassessmentofconcurrentvalidityandtestretestreliability AT timperioannaf workplacesittingbreaksquestionnairesitbrqanassessmentofconcurrentvalidityandtestretestreliability AT crawforddavida workplacesittingbreaksquestionnairesitbrqanassessmentofconcurrentvalidityandtestretestreliability AT dunstandavidw workplacesittingbreaksquestionnairesitbrqanassessmentofconcurrentvalidityandtestretestreliability AT baumanadriane workplacesittingbreaksquestionnairesitbrqanassessmentofconcurrentvalidityandtestretestreliability AT salmonjo workplacesittingbreaksquestionnairesitbrqanassessmentofconcurrentvalidityandtestretestreliability |