Cargando…

Validity and Reliability of IPAQ-SF and GPAQ for Assessing Sedentary Behaviour in Adults in the European Union: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Current lifestyles are marked by sedentary behaviour; thus, it is of great importance for policymaking to have valid and reliable tools to measure sedentary behaviour in order to combat it. Therefore, the aim of this review and meta-analysis is to critically review, assess, and compile the reliabili...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Meh, Kaja, Jurak, Gregor, Sorić, Maroje, Rocha, Paulo, Sember, Vedrana
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8123682/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33926123
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18094602
_version_ 1783692977818828800
author Meh, Kaja
Jurak, Gregor
Sorić, Maroje
Rocha, Paulo
Sember, Vedrana
author_facet Meh, Kaja
Jurak, Gregor
Sorić, Maroje
Rocha, Paulo
Sember, Vedrana
author_sort Meh, Kaja
collection PubMed
description Current lifestyles are marked by sedentary behaviour; thus, it is of great importance for policymaking to have valid and reliable tools to measure sedentary behaviour in order to combat it. Therefore, the aim of this review and meta-analysis is to critically review, assess, and compile the reliability, criterion validity, and construct validity of the single-item sedentary behaviour questions within national language versions of most commonly used international physical activity questionnaires for adults in the European Union: The International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Short Form and the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire. A total of 1749 records were screened, 287 full-text papers were read, and 14 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The results and quality of studies were evaluated by the Quality Assessment of Physical Activity Questionnaires checklist. Meta-analysis indicated moderate to high reliability (r(w) = 0.59) and concurrent validity (r(w) = 0.55) of national language versions of single-item sedentary behaviour questions. Criterion validity was rather low (r(w) = 0.23) but in concordance with previous studies. The risk of bias analysis highlighted the poor reporting of methods and results, with a total bias score of 0.42. Thus, we recommend using multi-item SB questionnaires and smart trackers for providing information on SB rather than single-item sedentary behaviour questions in physical activity questionnaires.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8123682
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81236822021-05-16 Validity and Reliability of IPAQ-SF and GPAQ for Assessing Sedentary Behaviour in Adults in the European Union: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Meh, Kaja Jurak, Gregor Sorić, Maroje Rocha, Paulo Sember, Vedrana Int J Environ Res Public Health Systematic Review Current lifestyles are marked by sedentary behaviour; thus, it is of great importance for policymaking to have valid and reliable tools to measure sedentary behaviour in order to combat it. Therefore, the aim of this review and meta-analysis is to critically review, assess, and compile the reliability, criterion validity, and construct validity of the single-item sedentary behaviour questions within national language versions of most commonly used international physical activity questionnaires for adults in the European Union: The International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Short Form and the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire. A total of 1749 records were screened, 287 full-text papers were read, and 14 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The results and quality of studies were evaluated by the Quality Assessment of Physical Activity Questionnaires checklist. Meta-analysis indicated moderate to high reliability (r(w) = 0.59) and concurrent validity (r(w) = 0.55) of national language versions of single-item sedentary behaviour questions. Criterion validity was rather low (r(w) = 0.23) but in concordance with previous studies. The risk of bias analysis highlighted the poor reporting of methods and results, with a total bias score of 0.42. Thus, we recommend using multi-item SB questionnaires and smart trackers for providing information on SB rather than single-item sedentary behaviour questions in physical activity questionnaires. MDPI 2021-04-26 /pmc/articles/PMC8123682/ /pubmed/33926123 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18094602 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Meh, Kaja
Jurak, Gregor
Sorić, Maroje
Rocha, Paulo
Sember, Vedrana
Validity and Reliability of IPAQ-SF and GPAQ for Assessing Sedentary Behaviour in Adults in the European Union: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title Validity and Reliability of IPAQ-SF and GPAQ for Assessing Sedentary Behaviour in Adults in the European Union: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full Validity and Reliability of IPAQ-SF and GPAQ for Assessing Sedentary Behaviour in Adults in the European Union: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Validity and Reliability of IPAQ-SF and GPAQ for Assessing Sedentary Behaviour in Adults in the European Union: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Validity and Reliability of IPAQ-SF and GPAQ for Assessing Sedentary Behaviour in Adults in the European Union: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_short Validity and Reliability of IPAQ-SF and GPAQ for Assessing Sedentary Behaviour in Adults in the European Union: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_sort validity and reliability of ipaq-sf and gpaq for assessing sedentary behaviour in adults in the european union: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8123682/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33926123
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18094602
work_keys_str_mv AT mehkaja validityandreliabilityofipaqsfandgpaqforassessingsedentarybehaviourinadultsintheeuropeanunionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT jurakgregor validityandreliabilityofipaqsfandgpaqforassessingsedentarybehaviourinadultsintheeuropeanunionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT soricmaroje validityandreliabilityofipaqsfandgpaqforassessingsedentarybehaviourinadultsintheeuropeanunionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT rochapaulo validityandreliabilityofipaqsfandgpaqforassessingsedentarybehaviourinadultsintheeuropeanunionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT sembervedrana validityandreliabilityofipaqsfandgpaqforassessingsedentarybehaviourinadultsintheeuropeanunionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis