Recommendations to improve the accuracy of estimates of physical activity derived from self report
ABSTRACT Assessment of physical activity using self-report has the potential for measurement error that can lead to incorrect inferences about physical activity behaviors and bias study results.
To provide recommendations to improve the accuracy of physical activity derived from self report.
We provide an overview of presentations and a compilation of perspectives shared by the authors of this paper and workgroup members.
We identified a conceptual framework for reducing errors using physical activity self-report questionnaires. The framework identifies 6 steps to reduce error: 1) identifying the need to measure physical activity, 2) selecting an instrument, 3) collecting data, 4) analyzing data, 5) developing a summary score, and 6) interpreting data. Underlying the first 4 steps are behavioral parameters of type, intensity, frequency, and duration of physical activities performed, activity domains, and the location where activities are performed. We identified ways to reduce measurement error at each step and made recommendations for practitioners, researchers, and organizational units to reduce error in questionnaire assessment of physical activity.
Self-report measures of physical activity have a prominent role in research and practice settings. Measurement error may be reduced by applying the framework discussed in this paper.
- SourceAvailable from: Peter Reaburn
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "These levels of exercise participation suggest that respondents might have personal experience with the potential benefits of exercise. A possible reason for the lack of a significant relationship between self-reported physical activity participation and frequency of exercise prescription in the present study is the potential overreporting of physical activity due to misclassification of activities by respondents, or a social desirability bias (Ainsworth et al. 2012; Dyrstad et al. 2014 "
ABSTRACT: Nurses working in mental health are well positioned to prescribe exercise to people with mental illness. However, little is known regarding their exercise-prescription practices. We examined the self-reported physical activity and exercise-prescription practices of nurses working in inpatient mental health facilities. Thirty-four nurses completed the Exercise in Mental Illness Questionnaire – Health Practitioner Version. Non-parametric bivariate statistics revealed no relationship between nurses' self-reported physical activity participation and the frequency of exercise prescription for people with mental illness. Exercise-prescription parameters used by nurses are consistent with those recommended for both the general population and for people with mental illness. A substantial number of barriers to effective exercise prescription, including lack of training, systemic issues (such as prioritization and lack of time), and lack of consumer motivation, impact on the prescription of exercise for people with mental illness. Addressing the barriers to exercise prescription could improve the proportion of nurses who routinely prescribe exercise. Collaboration with exercise professionals, such as accredited exercise physiologists or physiotherapists, might improve knowledge of evidence-based exercise-prescription practices for people with mental illness, thereby improving both physical and mental health outcomes for this vulnerable population.International journal of mental health nursing 02/2015; 24(2). DOI:10.1111/inm.12125 · 2.01 Impact Factor
- 04/2012, Degree: PhD, Supervisor: Andrea M. Kriska
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Physical inactivity is one of the four leading risk factors for global mortality. Accurate measurement of physical activity (PA) and in particular by physical activity questionnaires (PAQs) remains a challenge. The aim of this paper is to provide an updated systematic review of the reliability and validity characteristics of existing and more recently developed PAQs and to quantitatively compare the performance between existing and newly developed PAQs. A literature search of electronic databases was performed for studies assessing reliability and validity data of PAQs using an objective criterion measurement of PA between January 1997 and December 2011. Articles meeting the inclusion criteria were screened and data were extracted to provide a systematic overview of measurement properties. Due to differences in reported outcomes and criterion methods a quantitative meta-analysis was not possible. In total, 31 studies testing 34 newly developed PAQs, and 65 studies examining 96 existing PAQs were included. Very few PAQs showed good results on both reliability and validity. Median reliability correlation coefficients were 0.62–0.71 for existing, and 0.74–0.76 for new PAQs. Median validity coefficients ranged from 0.30–0.39 for existing, and from 0.25–0.41 for new PAQs. Although the majority of PAQs appear to have acceptable reliability, the validity is moderate at best. Newly developed PAQs do not appear to perform substantially better than existing PAQs in terms of reliability and validity. Future PAQ studies should include measures of absolute validity and the error structure of the instrument.International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 08/2012; 9(1):103. DOI:10.1186/1479-5868-9-103 · 3.68 Impact Factor