Accuracy and Repeatability of the Yale Physical Activity Survey in Assessing Physical Activity of Older Adults

Schuler, Petra B.; Richardson, Mark T.; Ochoa, Patricia; Wang, Min Q.

doi:10.2466/pms.2001.93.1.163

Cited by 34 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The test-retest reliability of the YPAS-queried sitting time in the current study is slightly better than has been previously reported 31,39,40 ; likely due to a 10-day measurement period being easier to recall compared to 2-week or longer recall periods. To date, the criterion-related validity of the YPAS to measure time spent in SB in older adults using accelerometer-derived SB time as the criterion has not been investigated.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 79%

“…However, several studies 31,39–41 have compared this survey’s sitting index to several physical activity-related constructs, including predicted maximal oxygen consumption, anthropometric measures, cardiovascular-related measures, and total accelerometer-derived physical activity counts, to examine its construct validity. Significant correlations were found between the YPAS sitting index and diastolic blood pressure (r = 0.53, P = 0.01) 31 , weight (r = 0.20, P = 0.048) 39 , and skinfold measures (r = 0.02, P = 0.03) 40 . No studies found significant inverse correlations between the YPAS sitting index and estimated oxygen consumption or accelerometer-derived physical activity counts.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reliability and Validity of 2 Self-Report Measures to Assess Sedentary Behavior in Older Adults

Gennuso

Matthews²,

Colbert³

2015

Journal of Physical Activity and Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The purpose of this study was to examine the reliability and validity of two currently available physical activity surveys for assessing time spent in sedentary behavior (SB) in older adults. Methods Fifty-eight adults (≥65 years) completed the Yale Physical Activity Survey for Older Adults (YPAS) and Community Health Activities Model Program for Seniors (CHAMPS) before and after a 10-day period during which they wore an ActiGraph accelerometer (ACC). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) examined test-retest reliability. Overall percent agreement and a kappa statistic examined YPAS validity. Lin’s concordance correlation, Pearson correlation, and Bland-Altman analysis examined CHAMPS validity. Results Both surveys had moderate test-retest reliability (ICC: YPAS=0.59 (P<0.001), CHAMPS=0.64 (P<0.001)) and significantly underestimated SB time. Agreement between YPAS and ACC was low (κ=−0.0003); however, there was a linear increase (P< 0.01) in ACC-derived SB time across YPAS response categories. There was poor agreement between ACC-derived SB and CHAMPS (Lin’s r=0.005; 95% CI, −0.010 to 0.020), and no linear trend across CHAMPS quartiles (p=0.53). Conclusions Neither of the surveys should be used as the sole measure of SB in a study; though the YPAS has the ability to rank individuals, providing it with some merit for use in correlational SB research.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 79%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Reliability and Validity of 2 Self-Report Measures to Assess Sedentary Behavior in Older Adults

Gennuso

Matthews²,

Colbert³

2015

Journal of Physical Activity and Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This may have increased their awareness about PA probably leading to an underestimation of the reproducibility of the FPACQ (Wendel-Vos, Schuit, Saris, & Kromhout, 2003). In addition, as pointed out by Schuler, Richardson, Ochoa and Wang (2001), it is possible that the first FPACQ administration served as a form of "primer" (i.e., participants may have paid closer attention to their activities after the first administration of the survey). Therefore, the discrepancy between the first and second administration may reflect a more accurate recall on the second administration.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability and Validity of the Flemish Physical Activity Computerized Questionnaire in Adults

Matton

Wijndaele

Duvigneaud

et al. 2007

Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to investigate the test-retest reliability and concurrent validity of the Flemish Physical Activity Computerized Questionnaire (FPACQ) in employed/unemployed and retired people. The FPACQ was developed to assess detailed information on several dimensions of physical activity and sedentary behavior over a usual week. A triaxial accelerometer, the RT3 Triaxial Research Tracker (RT3), in combination with a written 7-day activity record, was used as the objective criterion measure. In employed/unemployed people, 2-week test-retest reliability for several activity variables calculated from the FPACQ was good to excellent with intraclass correlations (ICCs) ranging from .67 to .99. In retired people ICCs were lower but, except for time spent eating, still fair to excellent, ranging from .57 to .96. Except for time spent in leisure time activities for men and the average energy expenditure related to sports participation in women, correlations between the RT3 and the FPACQ generally supported the relative validity of the FPACQ for employed/unemployed people (r ranging from .37 to .88). Values for retired people were somewhat lower (r ranging from .15 to .85), but most variables still reached at least moderate correlations. Concerning absolute validity, the FPACQ generally overestimated physical activity and underestimated sedentary behavior compared to the RT3. From this study, it can be concluded that the FPACQ is a reliable and reasonably valid questionnaire for assessing different dimensions of physical activity and sedentary behavior.

show abstract

“…For example, correlations between summary scores from the Community Healthy Activities Model Program for Seniors (CHAMPS) Physical Activity Questionnaire and various measures of physical functioning ranged between 0.10 and 0.54 [16,18-20]. For the CHAMPS Physical Activity Questionnaire and the Yale Physical Activity Survey, test-retest reliability was evaluated over a similar interval to this study (one to two weeks), and ICCs ranged from 0.55 to 0.79 [18,19,21]. …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

Using a single question to assess physical activity in older adults: a reliability and validity study

Gill

Jones

Zou

et al. 2012

BMC Med Res Methodol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundSingle-item physical activity questions provide a quick approximation of physical activity levels. While recall questionnaires provide a more detailed picture of an individual's level of physical activity, single-item questions may be more appropriate in certain situations. The aim of this study was to evaluate two single-item physical activity questions (one absolute question and one relative question) for test-retest reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity, in a sample of older adults.MethodsData was obtained from the Project to Prevent Falls in Veterans, a fall risk-factor screening and modification trial. One question measured absolute physical activity (seldom, moderately, vigorously active) and one measured relative physical activity (more, about as, less active than peers). Test-retest reliability was examined using weighted Kappa statistics (κ) in a sample of 43 subjects. Validity was assessed using correlation coefficients (r) in participants who received clinical assessments (n = 159).ResultsThe absolute physical activity question was more reliable than the relative physical activity question (κ = 0.75 vs. κ = 0.56). Convergent validity, however, was stronger for the relative physical activity question (r = 0.28 to 0.57 vs. r = 0.10 to 0.33). Discriminant validity was similar for both questions. For the relative physical activity question, there was moderate agreement when this question was re-administered seven days later, fair to moderate/good associations when compared with indicators of physical function, and little to no associations when compared with measures hypothesized to be theoretically not related to physical activity.ConclusionsThe relative physical activity question had the best combination of test-retest reliability, convergent validity and discriminant validity. In studies requiring a measure of physical activity, where physical activity is not the primary focus and more detailed measures are not feasible, a single question may be an acceptable alternative.

show abstract

Accuracy and Repeatability of the Yale Physical Activity Survey in Assessing Physical Activity of Older Adults

Cited by 34 publications

References 24 publications

Reliability and Validity of 2 Self-Report Measures to Assess Sedentary Behavior in Older Adults

Reliability and Validity of 2 Self-Report Measures to Assess Sedentary Behavior in Older Adults

Reliability and Validity of the Flemish Physical Activity Computerized Questionnaire in Adults

Using a single question to assess physical activity in older adults: a reliability and validity study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About