An Updated Systematic Review of Childhood Physical Activity Questionnaires

Abstract

Background and ObjectiveThis review is an update of a previous review published in 2010, and aims to summarize the available studies on the measurement properties of physical activity questionnaires for young people under the age of 18 years.MethodsSystematic literature searches were carried out using the online PubMed, EMBASE, and SPORTDiscus databases up to 2018. Articles had to evaluate at least one of the measurement properties of a questionnaire measuring at least the duration or frequency of children’s physical activity, and be published in the English language. The standardized COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist was used for the quality assessment of the studies.ResultsThis review yielded 87 articles on 89 different questionnaires. Within the 87 articles, 162 studies were conducted: 103 studies assessed construct validity, 50 assessed test–retest reliability, and nine assessed measurement error. Of these studies, 38% were of poor methodological quality and 49% of fair methodological quality. A questionnaire with acceptable validity was found only for adolescents, i.e., the Greek version of the 3-Day Physical Activity Record. Questionnaires with acceptable test–retest reliability were found in all age categories, i.e., preschoolers, children, and adolescents.ConclusionUnfortunately, no questionnaires were identified with conclusive evidence for both acceptable validity and reliability, partly due to the low methodological quality of the studies. This evidence is urgently needed, as current research and practice are using physical activity questionnaires of unknown validity and reliability. Therefore, recommendations for high-quality studies on measurement properties of physical activity questionnaires were formulated in the discussion.PROSPERO Registration NumberCRD42016038695.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s40279-018-0987-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Current Evidence of Measurement Properties of Physical Activity Questionnaires for Older Adults: An Updated Systematic Review

“…We used standardized criteria [36] for the rating of measurement properties which are in accordance with our previous reviews [18,19,[28][29][30]. However, the common problem when using cut points like this is dichotomization and loss of information.…”

“…• Because there was a clear lack of studies assessing responsiveness, we recommend assessing the responsiveness of the most promising questionnaires. • Because many different (versions of) questionnaires exist, we recommend improving the most promising questionnaires rather than developing new ones [19]. • Because the way we handle accelerometer data influences derived PA estimates [108], we recommend not only working on consensus-based standards but also providing a transparent description of accelerometer data collection and processing rules.…”

“…Already in 2000, Sallis and Saelens [15] recognized a profusion of PA questionnaires and suggested to select only a few, most qualified ones for future studies. Existing reviews on measurement properties of PA self-reports [18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28] usually focused on the adult population or a specific population of older adults (e.g., older adults with dementia). However, although research on PA in older adults has grown continuously [2], no firm recommendations for the most-qualified self-administered PA questionnaires for older adults have been provided.…”

“…Specifically, the reliability of the Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly (PASE) was rated as sufficient but the results for validity were inconsistent. Recently, the review for youth was updated [19] and a new one for pregnancy was published [18]. The present review is an update for older adults and aims to summarize, compare and appraise the measurement properties (i.e., reliability, measurement error, hypotheses testing for construct validity, responsiveness) of all available self-administered PA questionnaires in older adults aged > 55 years.…”

Effects of school-based physical activity and multi-micronutrient supplementation intervention on growth, health and well-being of schoolchildren in three African countries: the KaziAfya cluster randomised controlled trial protocol with a 2 × 2 factorial design

“…In our study, physical activity is assessed via self-reports and 7-day accelerometry. Although both methods have advantages and disadvantages [42,43], many researchers consider accelerometer-derived data as the most appropriate way to validly assess physical activity [44]. This particularly applies to children, where the assessment of selfreported physical activity is complicated by the fact that some cognitive functions are not yet fully developed.…”