Validity, reliability, and calibration of the physical activity unit 7 item screener (PAU-7S) at population scale.
Accelerometry
Children and adolescents
Self-reported physical activity
Short PAQ
Validation
Journal
The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity
ISSN: 1479-5868
Titre abrégé: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101217089
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
17 07 2021
17 07 2021
Historique:
received:
15
02
2021
accepted:
05
07
2021
entrez:
18
7
2021
pubmed:
19
7
2021
medline:
21
9
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Validation of self-reported tools, such as physical activity (PA) questionnaires, is crucial. The aim of this study was to determine test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and the concurrent, construct, and predictive validity of the short semi-quantitative Physical Activity Unit 7 item Screener (PAU-7S), using accelerometry as the reference measurement. The effect of linear calibration on PAU-7S validity was tested. A randomized sample of 321 healthy children aged 8-16 years (149 boys, 172 girls) from the nationwide representative PASOS study completed the PAU-7S before and after wearing an accelerometer for at least 7 consecutive days. Weight, height, and waist circumference were measured. Cronbach alpha was calculated for internal consistency. Test-retest reliability was determined by intra-class correlation (ICC). Concurrent validity was assessed by ICC and Spearman correlation coefficient between moderate to vigorous PA (MVPA) derived by the PAU-7S and by accelerometer. Concordance between both methods was analyzed by absolute agreement, weighted kappa, and Bland-Altman statistics. Multiple linear regression models were fitted for construct validity and predictive validity was determined by leave-one-out cross-validation. The PAU-7S overestimated MVPA by 18%, compared to accelerometers (106.5 ± 77.0 vs 95.2 ± 33.2 min/day, respectively). A Cronbach alpha of 0.76 showed an acceptable internal consistency of the PAU-7S. Test-retest reliability was good (ICC 0.71 p < 0.001). Spearman correlation and ICC coefficients of MVPA derived by the PAU-7S and accelerometers increased from 0.31 to 0.62 and 0.20 to 0.62, respectively, after calibration of the PAU-7S. Between-methods concordance improved from a weighted kappa of 0.24 to 0.50 after calibration. A slight reduction in ICC, from 0.62 to 0.60, yielded good predictive validity. Multiple linear regression models showed an inverse association of MVPA with standardized body mass index (β - 0.162; p < 0.077) and waist to height ratio (β - 0.010; p < 0.014). All validity dimensions were somewhat stronger in boys compared to girls. The PAU-7S shows a good test-retest reliability and acceptable internal consistency. All dimensions of validity increased from poor/fair to moderate/good after calibration. The PAU-7S is a valid instrument for measuring MVPA in children and adolescents. Trial registration number ISRCTN34251612 .
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Validation of self-reported tools, such as physical activity (PA) questionnaires, is crucial. The aim of this study was to determine test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and the concurrent, construct, and predictive validity of the short semi-quantitative Physical Activity Unit 7 item Screener (PAU-7S), using accelerometry as the reference measurement. The effect of linear calibration on PAU-7S validity was tested.
METHODS
A randomized sample of 321 healthy children aged 8-16 years (149 boys, 172 girls) from the nationwide representative PASOS study completed the PAU-7S before and after wearing an accelerometer for at least 7 consecutive days. Weight, height, and waist circumference were measured. Cronbach alpha was calculated for internal consistency. Test-retest reliability was determined by intra-class correlation (ICC). Concurrent validity was assessed by ICC and Spearman correlation coefficient between moderate to vigorous PA (MVPA) derived by the PAU-7S and by accelerometer. Concordance between both methods was analyzed by absolute agreement, weighted kappa, and Bland-Altman statistics. Multiple linear regression models were fitted for construct validity and predictive validity was determined by leave-one-out cross-validation.
RESULTS
The PAU-7S overestimated MVPA by 18%, compared to accelerometers (106.5 ± 77.0 vs 95.2 ± 33.2 min/day, respectively). A Cronbach alpha of 0.76 showed an acceptable internal consistency of the PAU-7S. Test-retest reliability was good (ICC 0.71 p < 0.001). Spearman correlation and ICC coefficients of MVPA derived by the PAU-7S and accelerometers increased from 0.31 to 0.62 and 0.20 to 0.62, respectively, after calibration of the PAU-7S. Between-methods concordance improved from a weighted kappa of 0.24 to 0.50 after calibration. A slight reduction in ICC, from 0.62 to 0.60, yielded good predictive validity. Multiple linear regression models showed an inverse association of MVPA with standardized body mass index (β - 0.162; p < 0.077) and waist to height ratio (β - 0.010; p < 0.014). All validity dimensions were somewhat stronger in boys compared to girls.
CONCLUSION
The PAU-7S shows a good test-retest reliability and acceptable internal consistency. All dimensions of validity increased from poor/fair to moderate/good after calibration. The PAU-7S is a valid instrument for measuring MVPA in children and adolescents.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
Trial registration number ISRCTN34251612 .
Identifiants
pubmed: 34274002
doi: 10.1186/s12966-021-01169-w
pii: 10.1186/s12966-021-01169-w
pmc: PMC8285783
doi:
Banques de données
ISRCTN
['ISRCTN34251612']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
98Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Gac Sanit. 2009 Nov-Dec;23(6):512-7
pubmed: 19493590
Med Clin (Barc). 2003 Nov 29;121(19):725-32
pubmed: 14678693
BMC Pediatr. 2014 Aug 29;14:215
pubmed: 25174356
Am J Clin Nutr. 2009 Mar;89(3):862-70
pubmed: 19144732
Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2019 Apr;29(4):566-574
pubmed: 30548545
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Oct 02;16(19):
pubmed: 31581617
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008 Jul 15;8:47
pubmed: 18627632
Expert Rev Endocrinol Metab. 2016 Nov;11(6):511-520
pubmed: 30058919
Physiother Theory Pract. 2012 Apr;28(3):188-97
pubmed: 21823992
Pediatr Obes. 2016 Apr;11(2):120-7
pubmed: 25893950
PLoS One. 2017 Jan 5;12(1):e0169527
pubmed: 28056080
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2019 Jun;51(6):1282-1291
pubmed: 31095085
Turk J Emerg Med. 2018 Aug 07;18(3):91-93
pubmed: 30191186
Am J Prev Med. 2017 Jun;52(6):880-887
pubmed: 28526365
J Sch Health. 2016 Sep;86(9):677-85
pubmed: 27492937
Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2016 Jun;41(6 Suppl 3):S197-239
pubmed: 27306431
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2020 Feb 10;17(1):16
pubmed: 32041635
Circulation. 2018 May 1;137(18):e495-e522
pubmed: 29618598
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008 Jan;40(1):181-8
pubmed: 18091006
Nestle Nutr Inst Workshop Ser. 2020;95:116-126
pubmed: 33161407
BMC Public Health. 2014 May 16;14:461
pubmed: 24886625
BMJ Open. 2020 Sep 23;10(9):e036210
pubmed: 32967871
Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol. 2010 Feb;37(2):143-9
pubmed: 19719745
Sports Med. 2018 Dec;48(12):2797-2842
pubmed: 30298479
Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil. 2010 Apr;17(2):127-39
pubmed: 20215971
Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes. 2019 Feb;26(1):25-31
pubmed: 30507695
BMC Public Health. 2018 Mar 27;18(1):412
pubmed: 29587694
Bull World Health Organ. 2007 Sep;85(9):660-7
pubmed: 18026621
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2001 May;155(5):554-9
pubmed: 11343497
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2011 Oct 21;8:115
pubmed: 22018588
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2012 Aug 31;9:103
pubmed: 22938557
PLoS One. 2015 Dec 02;10(12):e0143949
pubmed: 26630346
Sports Med. 2010 Jul 1;40(7):539-63
pubmed: 20545380
J Sports Sci. 2021 Apr;39(7):801-807
pubmed: 33213295
J Phys Act Health. 2011 Jan;8(1):71-8
pubmed: 21297187
Stat Med. 1989 Sep;8(9):1051-69; discussion 1071-3
pubmed: 2799131