Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorSagelv, Edvard Hamnvik
dc.contributor.authorHopstock, Laila Arnesdatter
dc.contributor.authorJohansson, Jonas
dc.contributor.authorHansen, Bjørge Herman
dc.contributor.authorSøren, Brage
dc.contributor.authorHorsch, Alexander
dc.contributor.authorEkelund, Ulf
dc.contributor.authorMorseth, Bente
dc.date.accessioned2021-03-19T00:09:43Z
dc.date.available2021-03-19T00:09:43Z
dc.date.created2020-02-27T14:13:12Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.citationBMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine. 2020, 6(1), Artikkel e000661.en_US
dc.identifier.issn2055-7647
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/2734328
dc.descriptionThis is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial.en_US
dc.description.abstractObjectives: We compared the ability of physical activity and sitting time questionnaires (PAQ) for ranking individuals versus continuous volume calculations (physical activity level (PAL), metabolic equivalents of task (MET), sitting hours) against accelerometry measured physical activity as our criterion. Methods: Participants in a cohort from the Tromsø Study completed three questionnaires; (1) The Saltin-Grimby Physical Activity Level Scale (SGPALS) (n=4040); (2) The Physical Activity Frequency, Intensity and Duration (PAFID) questionnaire (n=5902)) calculated as MET-hours·week-1 and (3) The International Physical Activity questionnaire (IPAQ) short-form sitting question (n=4896). We validated the questionnaires against the following accelerometry (Actigraph wGT3X-BT) estimates: vector magnitude counts per minute, steps∙day-1, time (minutes·day-1) in sedentary behaviour, light physical activity, moderate and vigorous physical activity (MVPA) non-bouted and ≥10 min bouted MVPA. Results: Ranking of physical activity according to the SGPALS and quartiles (Q) of MET-hours∙week-1 from the PAFID were both positively associated with accelerometry estimates of physical activity (p<0.001) but correlations with accelerometry estimates were weak (SGPALS (PAL): r=0.11 to 0.26, p<0.001) and weak-to-moderate (PAFID: r=0.39 to 0.44, p<0.01). There was 1 hour of accelerometry measured sedentary time from Q1 to Q4 in the IPAQ sitting question (p<0.001) and also weak correlations (r=0.22, p<0.01). Conclusion: Ranking of physical activity levels measured with PAQs appears to have higher validity than energy expenditure calculations. Self-reported sedentary time poorly reflects accelerometry measured sedentary time. These two PAQs can be used for ranking individuals into different physical activity categories supporting previous studies using these instruments when assessing associations with health outcomes.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.subjectphysical activityen_US
dc.subjectsitting time questionnairesen_US
dc.subjectPAQen_US
dc.subjectPALen_US
dc.subjectMETen_US
dc.subjectaccelerometryen_US
dc.titleCriterion validity of two physical activity and one sedentary time questionnaire against accelerometry in a large cohort of adults and older adultsen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.rights.holder© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020en_US
dc.source.pagenumber7en_US
dc.source.volume6en_US
dc.source.journalBMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicineen_US
dc.source.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1136/bmjsem-2019-000661
dc.identifier.cristin1798159
dc.description.localcodeInstitutt for idrettsmedisinske fag / Department of Sports Medicineen_US
dc.source.articlenumbere000661en_US
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel