» Articles » PMID: 20545382

Self-administered Physical Activity Questionnaires for the Elderly: a Systematic Review of Measurement Properties

Overview
Journal Sports Med
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 2010 Jun 16
PMID 20545382
Citations 76
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To systematically review and appraise studies examining self-administered physical activity questionnaires (PAQ) for the elderly. This article is one of a group of four articles in Sports Medicine on the content and measurement properties of PAQs. LITERATURE SEARCH METHODOLOGY: Searches in PubMed, EMBASE and SportDiscu (until May 2009) on self-administered PAQ. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (i) the study examined (at least one of) the measurement properties of a self-administered PAQ; (ii) the questionnaire aimed to measure physical activity (PA) in older people; (iii) the average age of the study population was >55 years; (iv) the article was written in English. We excluded PA interviews, diaries and studies that evaluated the measurement properties of a self-administered PAQ in a specific population, such as patients. We used a standard checklist (qualitative attributes and measurement properties of PA questionnaires [QAPAQ]) for appraising the measurement properties of PAQs.

Findings: Eighteen articles on 13 PAQs were reviewed, including 16 reliability analyses and 25 validity analyses (of which 15 were on construct validity, seven on health/functioning associations, two on known-groups validity and one on responsiveness). Many studies suffered from methodological flaws, e.g. too small sample size or inadequate time interval between test and retest. Three PAQs received a positive rating on reliability: IPAQ-C (International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Chinese), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) > or = 0.81; WHI-PAQ (Women's Health Initiative-PAQ), ICC = 0.76; and PASE (Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly), Pearson correlation coefficient (r) = 0.84. However, PASE was negatively rated on reliability in another study (ICC = 0.65). One PAQ received a positive rating on construct validity: PASE against Mini-Logger (r > 0.52), but PASE was negatively rated in another study against accelerometer and another PAQ, Spearman correlation coefficient = 0.17 and 0.48, respectively. Three of the 13 PAQs were tested for health/functioning associations and all three were positively rated in some categories of PA in many studies (r > 0.30).

Conclusions: Even though several studies showed an association between the tested PAQ and health/functioning variables, the knowledge about reliability and construct validity of self-administrated PAQs for older adults is still scarce and more high-quality validation studies are needed.

Citing Articles

Psychometric Validation of the German Version of the Rapid Assessment of Physical Activity (RAPA): A Secondary Analysis of Cross-Sectional Survey Data.

McGowan H, Crutzen R, Topolski T, Kulnik S Health Sci Rep. 2025; 8(1):e70353.

PMID: 39839579 PMC: 11747865. DOI: 10.1002/hsr2.70353.


Relationship between physical activities and mental health in older people: a bibliometric analysis.

Zhang Y, Zhou M, Yin Z, Zhuang W, Wang Y Front Psychiatry. 2024; 15:1424745.

PMID: 39497901 PMC: 11532734. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1424745.


Physical activity during COVID-19 in people with systemic sclerosis: A Scleroderma Patient-centred Intervention Network COVID-19 Cohort longitudinal study.

Wurz A, Henry R, Kwakkenbos L, Carrier M, Patten S, Bartlett S J Scleroderma Relat Disord. 2024; 9(2):110-116.

PMID: 38910597 PMC: 11188848. DOI: 10.1177/23971983241241593.


The Chinese version of the general benefit finding scale (GBFS): Psychometric properties in a sample of college students.

Hui Z, Wang X, Teng Z, Zou W, Wang J, Ji P PLoS One. 2024; 19(5):e0300064.

PMID: 38713666 PMC: 11075837. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0300064.


Validity, reliability, and readability of single-item and short physical activity questionnaires for use in surveillance: A systematic review.

Tcymbal A, Messing S, Mait R, Perez R, Akter T, Rakovac I PLoS One. 2024; 19(3):e0300003.

PMID: 38470871 PMC: 10931432. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0300003.


References
1.
Matton L, Wijndaele K, Duvigneaud N, Duquet W, Philippaerts R, Thomis M . Reliability and validity of the Flemish Physical Activity Computerized Questionnaire in adults. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2007; 78(4):293-306. DOI: 10.1080/02701367.2007.10599427. View

2.
Deng H, Macfarlane D, Neil Thomas G, Lao X, Jiang C, Cheng K . Reliability and validity of the IPAQ-Chinese: the Guangzhou Biobank Cohort study. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008; 40(2):303-7. DOI: 10.1249/mss.0b013e31815b0db5. View

3.
Harada N, Chiu V, King A, Stewart A . An evaluation of three self-report physical activity instruments for older adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2001; 33(6):962-70. DOI: 10.1097/00005768-200106000-00016. View

4.
Van Poppel M, Chinapaw M, Mokkink L, van Mechelen W, Terwee C . Physical activity questionnaires for adults: a systematic review of measurement properties. Sports Med. 2010; 40(7):565-600. DOI: 10.2165/11531930-000000000-00000. View

5.
Washburn R, Smith K, Jette A, Janney C . The Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly (PASE): development and evaluation. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993; 46(2):153-62. DOI: 10.1016/0895-4356(93)90053-4. View