4.6 Article

Validity of Electronically Administered Recent Physical Activity Questionnaire (RPAQ) in Ten European Countries

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 9, Issue 3, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0092829

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. European Union (Integrated Project in the Framework Programme 6 of the European Community) [LSHM-CT-2006-037197]
  2. Medical Research Council, UK [MC_UU_12015/3]
  3. Gates Cambridge
  4. St. John's College Cambridge
  5. School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge
  6. MRC [MC_U106179473, MC_UU_12015/3, MC_UU_12015/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  7. Medical Research Council [MC_UU_12015/1, MC_U106179471, MC_UU_12015/3, MC_U106179473] Funding Source: researchfish
  8. National Institute for Health Research [NF-SI-0512-10135] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To examine the validity of the Recent Physical Activity Questionnaire (RPAQ) which assesses physical activity (PA) in 4 domains (leisure, work, commuting, home) during past month. Methods: 580 men and 1343 women from 10 European countries attended 2 visits at which PA energy expenditure (PAEE), time at moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) and sedentary time were measured using individually-calibrated combined heart-rate and movement sensing. At the second visit, RPAQ was administered electronically. Validity was assessed using agreement analysis. Results: RPAQ significantly underestimated PAEE in women [median(IQR) 34.1 (22.1, 52.2) vs. 40.6 (32.4, 50.9) kJ/kg/day, 95%LoA: -44.4, 63.4 kJ/kg/day) and in men (43.7 (29.0, 69.0) vs. 45.5 (34.1, 57.6) kJ/kg/day, 95%LoA: -47.2, 101.3 kJ/kg/day]. Using individualised definition of 1MET, RPAQ significantly underestimated MVPA in women [median(IQR): 62.1 (29.4, 124.3) vs. 73.6 (47.8, 107.2) min/day, 95%LoA: -130.5, 305.3 min/day] and men [82.7 (38.8, 185.6) vs. 83.3 (55.1, 125.0) min/day, 95%LoA: -136.4, 400.1 min/day]. Correlations (95%CI) between subjective and objective estimates were statistically significant [PAEE: women, rho = 0.20 (0.15-0.26); men, rho = 0.37 (0.30-0.44); MVPA: women, rho = 0.18 (0.13-0.23); men, rho = 0.31 (0.24-0.39)]. When using non-individualised definition of 1MET (3.5 mlO(2)/kg/min), MVPA was substantially overestimated (similar to 30 min/day). Revisiting occupational intensity assumptions in questionnaire estimation algorithms with occupational group-level empirical distributions reduced median PAEE-bias in manual (25.1 kJ/kg/day vs. 29.0 kJ/kg/day, p<0.001) and heavy manual workers (64.1 vs. -4.6 kJ/kg/day, p<0.001) in an independent hold-out sample. Conclusion: Relative validity of RPAQ-derived PAEE and MVPA is comparable to previous studies but underestimation of PAEE is smaller. Electronic RPAQ may be used in large-scale epidemiological studies including surveys, providing information on all domains of PA.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available