66
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Assessment of physical activity in older Belgian adults: validity and reliability of an adapted interview version of the long International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ-L)

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Adequate monitoring of older adults’ physical activity (PA) is essential to develop effective health promotion programs. The present study examined criterion validity and test-retest reliability of the long International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ-L), adapted for Belgian, community-dwelling older adults (65y and older).

          Methods

          Participants (n = 434) completed the last seven days version of IPAQ-L, modified for the Belgian population of community-dwelling older adults. This elderly-adapted version of IPAQ-L combined vigorous and moderate activities, and questions on gait speed and recreational cycling were added. Furthermore, participants wore an ActiGraph GT3X(+) accelerometer for at least five days. Criterion validity was determined by comparing self-reported weekly minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) and weekly minutes of total PA with accelerometer data, defined by two different cut points (Freedson vs. Copeland). To examine test-retest reliability, a subsample of 29 participants completed IPAQ-L for a second time within a ten day interval.

          Results

          IPAQ-L showed moderate criterion validity for measuring weekly minutes of MVPA and total PA (Spearman’s ρ range 0.33–0.40). However, plots on agreement between self-reported and accelerometer PA showed a systematic over-reporting of IPAQ-L for MVPA. In contrast, plots indicated that IPAQ-L under-estimated levels of total PA, however, this under-estimation of total PA was substantially lower than the observed over-reporting of MVPA. Test-retest reliability was moderate-to-good for work-related PA, domestic PA, MVPA and total PA (ICC range 0.52–0.81), but poorer for transportation and recreational PA (ICC 0.44 and 0.43, respectively).

          Conclusions

          Criterion validity results suggest that IPAQ-L is more valid to measure older adults’ weekly minutes of total PA than weekly MVPA minutes. Moreover, results might imply that content validity of IPAQ-L can be improved if specific light-intensity PA items are incorporated into IPAQ-L. Test-retest reliability of IPAQ-L was moderate to good, except for weekly minutes of transportation and recreational PA, probably due to week-to-week variability of these behaviors.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-015-1785-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references37

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

          In clinical measurement comparison of a new measurement technique with an established one is often needed to see whether they agree sufficiently for the new to replace the old. Such investigations are often analysed inappropriately, notably by using correlation coefficients. The use of correlation is misleading. An alternative approach, based on graphical techniques and simple calculations, is described, together with the relation between this analysis and the assessment of repeatability.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Calibration of the Computer Science and Applications, Inc. accelerometer.

            We established accelerometer count ranges for the Computer Science and Applications, Inc. (CSA) activity monitor corresponding to commonly employed MET categories. Data were obtained from 50 adults (25 males, 25 females) during treadmill exercise at three different speeds (4.8, 6.4, and 9.7 km x h(-1)). Activity counts and steady-state oxygen consumption were highly correlated (r = 0.88), and count ranges corresponding to light, moderate, hard, and very hard intensity levels were or = 9499 cnts x min(-1), respectively. A model to predict energy expenditure from activity counts and body mass was developed using data from a random sample of 35 subjects (r2 = 0.82, SEE = 1.40 kcal x min(-1)). Cross validation with data from the remaining 15 subjects revealed no significant differences between actual and predicted energy expenditure at any treadmill speed (SEE = 0.50-1.40 kcal x min(-1)). These data provide a template on which patterns of activity can be classified into intensity levels using the CSA accelerometer.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Measuring agreement in method comparison studies.

              Agreement between two methods of clinical measurement can be quantified using the differences between observations made using the two methods on the same subjects. The 95% limits of agreement, estimated by mean difference +/- 1.96 standard deviation of the differences, provide an interval within which 95% of differences between measurements by the two methods are expected to lie. We describe how graphical methods can be used to investigate the assumptions of the method and we also give confidence intervals. We extend the basic approach to data where there is a relationship between difference and magnitude, both with a simple logarithmic transformation approach and a new, more general, regression approach. We discuss the importance of the repeatability of each method separately and compare an estimate of this to the limits of agreement. We extend the limits of agreement approach to data with repeated measurements, proposing new estimates for equal numbers of replicates by each method on each subject, for unequal numbers of replicates, and for replicated data collected in pairs, where the underlying value of the quantity being measured is changing. Finally, we describe a nonparametric approach to comparing methods.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                veerle.vanholle@ugent.be
                ilse.debourdeaudhuij@ugent.be
                benedicte.deforche@vub.ac.be
                jelle.van.cauwenberg@vub.ac.be
                delfien.vandyck@ugent.be
                Journal
                BMC Public Health
                BMC Public Health
                BMC Public Health
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2458
                28 April 2015
                28 April 2015
                2015
                : 15
                : 433
                Affiliations
                [ ]Department of Movement and Sport Sciences, Ghent University, Watersportlaan 2, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
                [ ]Department of Public Health, Ghent University, De Pintelaan 185 4 K3, B-9000 Gent, Belgium
                [ ]Research Foundation Flanders, Egmontstraat 5, B-1000 Brussels, Belgium
                Article
                1785
                10.1186/s12889-015-1785-3
                4427934
                25928561
                dbc4d7b2-8b01-4cc0-b650-e5c50ce251a3
                © Van Holle et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015

                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.

                History
                : 4 November 2014
                : 22 April 2015
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2015

                Public health
                Public health

                Comments

                Comment on this article