Validity of the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ) in assessing levels and change in moderate-vigorous physical activity and sedentary behaviour

BMC Public Health

Mark A Tully²  James F Sallis¹  Margaret E Cupples³  Frank Kee²  Ruth F Hunter²  Claire L Cleland⁴ 

[1] Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of California, San Diego, USA;UKCRC Centre of Excellence for Public Health (NI), Centre for Public Health, School of Dentistry, Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Queen’s University Belfast, Clinical Sciences Block B, Royal Victoria Hospital, Grosvenor Road, Belfast BT12 6BJ, Northern Ireland;Department of General Practice and Primary Care, School of Dentistry, Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Queen’s University Belfast, 1, Dunluce Avenue, Belfast BT9 7HR, Northern Ireland;MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, Top floor, 200, Renfield Street, Glasgow G2 3QB, Scotland

关键词: Sedentary behaviour;    Accelerometer;    Physical activity;    Measurement;    Validation;    GPAQ;   

Others  :  1122852
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2458-14-1255

 received in 2014-07-21, accepted in 2014-12-03,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Feasible, cost-effective instruments are required for the surveillance of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) and sedentary behaviour (SB) and to assess the effects of interventions. However, the evidence base for the validity and reliability of the World Health Organisation-endorsed Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ) is limited. We aimed to assess the validity of the GPAQ, compared to accelerometer data in measuring and assessing change in MVPA and SB.

Methods

Participants (n = 101) were selected randomly from an on-going research study, stratified by level of physical activity (low, moderate or highly active, based on the GPAQ) and sex. Participants wore an accelerometer (Actigraph GT3X) for seven days and completed a GPAQ on Day 7. This protocol was repeated for a random sub-sample at a second time point, 3–6 months later. Analysis involved Wilcoxon-signed rank tests for differences in measures, Bland-Altman analysis for the agreement between measures for median MVPA and SB mins/day, and Spearman’s rho coefficient for criterion validity and extent of change.

Results

95 participants completed baseline measurements (44 females, 51 males; mean age 44 years, (SD 14); measurements of change were calculated for 41 (21 females, 20 males; mean age 46 years, (SD 14). There was moderate agreement between GPAQ and accelerometer for MVPA mins/day (r = 0.48) and poor agreement for SB (r = 0.19). The absolute mean difference (self-report minus accelerometer) for MVPA was −0.8 mins/day and 348.7 mins/day for SB; and negative bias was found to exist, with those people who were more physically active over-reporting their level of MVPA: those who were more sedentary were less likely to under-report their level of SB. Results for agreement in change over time showed moderate correlation (r = 0.52, p = 0.12) for MVPA and poor correlation for SB (r = −0.024, p = 0.916).

Conclusions

Levels of agreement with objective measurements indicate the GPAQ is a valid measure of MVPA and change in MVPA but is a less valid measure of current levels and change in SB. Thus, GPAQ appears to be an appropriate measure for assessing the effectiveness of interventions to promote MVPA.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Cleland et al.; licensee BioMed Central.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Bauman A, Phangsavan P, Schoeppe S, Owen N: Physical activity measurement – a primer for health promotion. Promot Educ 2006, 8:92-103.
• [2]Paulik E, Bόka F, Kertész SB, Balogh S, Nagymajtényi L: Determinants of health-promoting lifestyle behaviours in the rural areas of Hungary. Health Promot Int 2010, 25:277-288.
• [3]Lee IM, Shiroma EJ, Lobelo F, Puska P, Blair SN, Katzmarzyk PT, Lancet Physical Activity Series Working Group: Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide: an analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy. Lancet 2012, 21:219-229.
• [4]Riley L, Cowan M: Noncommunicable Diseases Country Profiles 2014. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2014.
• [5]Mokdad AH, Marks JS, Stroup DF, Gerberding JL: Actual causes of death in the United States. JAMA 2000, 291:238-1245.
• [6]Cleland CL: Physical activity Interventions in Socio-Economically Disadvantaged Communities. Belfast: Queens University; 2013. Phd Thesis
• [7]Sedentary Behaviour Research Network: Letter to the editor: standardized use of the terms “sedentary” and “sedentary behaviours”. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 2012, 37(3):540-542.
• [8]Pate RR, O’Neill JR, Lobelo F: The evolving definition of “sedentary”. Exerc Sport Sci Rev 2008, 36(4):173-178.
• [9]Tremblay MS, Colley RC, Saunders TJ, Healy GN, Owen N: Physiological and health implications of a sedentary lifestyle. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 2010, 35:725-740.
• [10]Edwardson CL, Gorely T, Davies MJ, Gray LJ, Khunti K, Wilmot EG, Yates T, Biddle SJ: Association of sedentary behaviour with metabolic syndrome: a meta-analysis. PLoS One 2012, 7(4):e34916.
• [11]Ford ES, Caspersen CJ: Sedentary behaviour and cardiovascular disease: a review of prospective studies. Int J Epidemiol 2012, 41:1338-1353.
• [12]Caspersen CJ, Powell KE, Christenson GM: Physical activity, exercise, and physical fitness: definitions and distinctions for health-related research. Public Health Rep 1985, 100:126-131.
• [13]U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Division of Nutrition and Physical Activity: Promoting Physical Activity: A Guide for Community Action. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 1999.
• [14]WHO: Physical Inactivity: A Global Public Health Problem. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2011.
• [15]Bull FC, Maslin TS, Armstrong T: Global physical activity questionnaire (GPAQ) nine country reliability and validity study. J Phys Act Health 2009, 6:790-804.
• [16]Boon RM, Hamlin MJ, Steel GD, Ross JJ: Validation of the New Zealand Physical Activity Questionnaire (NZPAQ-LF) and the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ-LF) with accelerometry. Br J Sports Med 2008, 44:741-746.
• [17]Prince SA, Adamo KB, Hamel ME, Hardt J, Connor Gorber S, Tremblay M: A comparison of direct versus self-report measures for assessing physical activity in adults: a systematic review. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2008, 5:56. BioMed Central Full Text
• [18]World Health Organization: WHO STEPS Surveillance Manual: the WHO STEPwise Approach to Chronic Disease Risk Factor Surveillance. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2005.
• [19]World Health Organization: Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health. In Proceedings of the 57th World Health Assembly. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2004:2-18.
• [20]Singh A, Purohit B: Evaluation of Global Physical activity Questionnaire (GPAQ) among healthy and obese health professionals in central India. Baltic J Health Phys Act 2011, 3:34-43.
• [21]Armstrong T, Bull F: Development of the World Health Organisation Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ). J Public Health 2006, 14:66-70.
• [22]Herrmann SD, Heumann KJ, Der Ananian CA, Ainsworth BE: Validity and reliability of the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ). Meas Phys Educ Exerc Sci 2013, 17:221-235.
• [23]Kl S, Manan Wm WA, Wn WS: The Bahasa Melayu Version of the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire: reliability and validity study in Malaysia. Asia Pac J Public Health 2012. [Epub ahead of print]
• [24]Au TB, Blizzard L, Schmidt M, Pham LH, Magnussen C, Dwyer T: Reliability and validity of the global physical activity questionnaire in Vietnam. J Phys Act Health 2010, 7:410-418.
• [25]Hoos T, Espinoza N, Marshall S, Arredondo EM: Validity of the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ) in adult Latinas. J Phys Act Health 2012, 9:698-705.
• [26]Tully MA, Hunter RF, McAneney H, Cupples ME, Donnelly M, Ellis G, Hutchinson G, Prior L, Stevenson M, Kee F: Physical activity and the rejuvenation of Connswater (PARC study): protocol for a natural experiment investigating the impact of urban regeneration on public health. BMC Public Health 2013, 13:774. BioMed Central Full Text
• [27]Bland JM, Altman DG: Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986, 1:307-310.
• [28]Freedson PS, Melanson E, Sirard J: Calibration of the computer science and applications, inc. Accelerometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1998, 30:777-781.
• [29]Craig CL, Marshall AL, Sjöström M, Bauman AE, Booth ML, Ainsworth BE, Pratt M, Ekelund U, Yngve A, Sallis JF, Oja P: International Physical Activity Questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2003, 35:1381-1395.
• [30]Cain KL, Geremia CM: Accelerometer Data Collection and Scoring Manual for Adult & Senior Studies. http://sallis.ucsd.edu/measures.html webcite
• [31]Sarfit MJ, Wood TM: Introduction to Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science. Missouri: Mosby; 1990.
• [32]Ekelund E, Neovius M, Linné Y, Rössner S: The criterion validity of a last 7-day physical activity questionnaire (SAPAQ) for use in adolescents with a wide variation in body fat: the Stockholm Weight Development Study. Int J Obes 2006, 30:1019-1021.
• [33]Ransdell LB, Vener JM, Sell K: International perspectives: the influence of gender on lifetime physical activity participation. J R Soc Promot Health 2004, 124:12-14.
• [34]Bland JM, Altman DG: Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res 1999, 8:135-160.
• [35]Landis JR, Koch GG: The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977, 33:159-174.
• [36]Ekelund U, Sepp H, Brage S, Becker W, Jakes R, Hennings M, Wareham NJ: Criterion-related validity of the last 7-day, short form of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire in Swedish adults. Public Health Nutr 2005, 9:258-265.
• [37]Clemes SA, David BM, Zhao Y, Han X, Brown WJ: Validity of two self-report measures of sitting time. J Phys Act Health 2012, 9:533-539.
• [38]Clark BK, Sugiyama T, Healy GN, Salmon J, Dunstan DW, Owen N: Validity and reliability of measures of television viewing time and other non-occupational sedentary behaviour of adults: a review. Obes Rev 2009, 10:7-16.
• [39]Rosenberg DE, Bull FC, Marshall AL, Sallis JF, Bauman AE: Assessment of sedentary behavior with the International Physical Activity Questionnaire. J Phys Act Health 2008, 5(Suppl 1):S30-S44.
• [40]Atkin AJ, Gorely T, Clemes SA, Yates T, Edwardson C, Brage S, Salmon J, Marshall SJ, Biddle SJ: Methods of measurement in epidemiology: sedentary behaviour. Int J Epidemiol 2012, 41:1460-1471.
• [41]Hardy LL, Hills AP, Timperio A, Cliff D, Lubans D, Morgan PJ, Taylor BJ, Brown H: A hitchhiker’s guide to assessing sedentary behaviour among young people: deciding what method to use. J Sci Med Sport 2013, 16:28-35.
• [42]Hart TL, Ainsworth BE, Tudor-Locke C: Objective and subjective measures of sedentary behavior and physical activity. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2011, 43:449-456.
• [43]Harrison CL, Thompson RG, Teede HJ, Lombard CB: Measuring physical activity during pregnancy. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2011, 8:19. BioMed Central Full Text
• [44]Plasqui G, Westerterp KR: Physical activity assessment with accelerometers: an evaluation against doubly labelled water. Obesity 2007, 15:2371-2379.
• [45]Vanhelst J, Theunynck D, Gottrand F, Béghin L: Reliability of the RT3 accelerometer for measurement of physical activity in adolescents. J Sports Sci 2010, 28:375-379.
• [46]Santos-Lozano A, Torres-Luque G, Marin PJ, Ruiz JR, Lucia A, Garatachea N: Intermonitor variability of GT3X accelerometer. Int J Sports Med 2012, 33(12):994-999.
• [47]Herman Hansen B, Børtnes I, Hildebrand M, Holme I, Kolle E, Anderssen SA: Validity of the ActiGraph GT1M during walking and cycling. J Sports Sci 2014, 32(6):510-516.
• [48]Haskell WL: Physical activity by self-report: a brief history and future issues. J Phys Act Health 2012, 9(Suppl 1):S5-S10.