4.2 Article

Convergent validity of the Physical Activity Questionnaire for Children (PAQ-C): assessing moderate-to-vigorous or total physical activity?

Journal

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/1091367X.2022.2062244

Keywords

Accelerometer; self-report; school; surveillance; health promotion

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examines the convergent validity of the Physical Activity Questionnaire for Children (PAQ-C) for assessing moderate-to-vigorous and total physical activity in school children. The results show that the PAQ-C total score is moderately associated with both moderate-to-vigorous and total physical activity, with higher associations in girls compared to boys. Acceptable measurement bias was found in all age groups. Researchers should be cautious when using the PAQ-C to assess moderate-to-vigorous physical activity in school children.
This study examines the convergent validity of the Physical Activity Questionnaire for Children (PAQ-C) for assessing moderate-to-vigorous and total physical activity (PA) in school children. 430 participants (51.6% girls) aged 9-12 years provided valid accelerometer data (wGT3X-BT) and completed the PAQ-C. Convergent validity was assessed using Pearson correlations (r) and Bland-Altman plots. The PAQ-C total score was similarly associated with moderate-to-vigorous PA and total PA (r = .28 and .26, p < .001, respectively). 10- and 11-year-old groups were the only in which the PAQ-C was significantly associated with both accelerometer variables (p < .001). Girls showed higher associations (r = .31 for each, p < .001) than boys (r = .18 and .15 for moderate-to-vigorous PA and total PA, respectively, p < .05). Acceptable measurement bias for all age groups (range, 3.6-7%) was found. Researchers should be cautious when using the PAQ-C to assess moderate-to-vigorous PA in school children.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available