Standardized Surveys of Walking & Bicylcing Database:
|
|
|
List of Validation Studies of Physical Activity Questionnaires Containing Walking/Bicycling Questions
- Table 1. Validation Studies of the Ainsworth New Physical Activity Questionnaire (N-PAQ)
- Table 2. Validation Studies of the Arizona Activity Frequency Questionnaire (AAFQ)
- Table 3. Validation Studies of the Allied Dunbar National Fitness Survey (ADNFS)
- Table 4. Auckland Heart Study (AHS) Physical Activity Questionnaire
- Table 5. Validation Studies of the Baecke Activity Questionnaire (BAQ)
- Table 6. Modified Baecke Questionnaire (MBAQ)
- Table 7. Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System - New Walking Module
- Table 8. Campbell Survey on Well-Being in Canada Physical Activity Monitor (PAM)
- Table 9. Central Sweden Physical Activity Questionnaire (CSPAQ)
- Table 10. CARDIA Physical Activity Questionnaire
- Table 11. CHAMPS Activities Questionnaire for Older Adults
- Table 12. European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) Physical Activity Questions
- Table 13. European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition - Norfolk (EPIC2) Physical Activity Questions
- Table 14a. Health Insurance Plan of New York City (HIP) Activity Questionnaire
- Table 14b. Historical Leisure Activity Questionnaire (HLAQ)
- Table 15. International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ)
- Table 16. Kaiser Physical Activity Survey (KPAS)
- Table 17. Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam (LASA)-Physical Activity Questionnaire (LAPAQ)
- Table 18. Minnesota Leisure-time Physical activity questionnaire (MLTPAQ)
- Table 19. The Modifiable Activity Questionnaire (MAQ)/Pima Indian Questionnaire
- Table 20. The MONICA Optional Study of Physical Activity (MOSPA-Q)
- Table 21. National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) - walking questions
- Table 22. Nurses Health Study II Activity and Inactivity Questionnaire (NHS II-PAQ)
- Table 23. One-Page Questionnaire of Physical activity (VITAL - study)
- Table 24. Perceived Functional Ability (PFA) Questionnaire/Physical Activity Rating (PA-R) Questionnaire
- Table 25. Paffenbarger Physical Activity Questionnaire/College Alumnus Questionnaire (CAQ)
- Table 26. Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly (PASE)
- Table 27. Physical Activity Scale (PAS)
- Table 28. Postmenopausal Osteopenia PAQ (Activity Questionnaire-AQ)
- Table 29. Quantitative physical activity recall questions (QPAR) - Aerobics Center Longitudinal Study - 1982 and baseline
- Table 30. The Short Questionnaire to assess Health-enhancing Physical activity (SQUASH)
- Table 31. Stanford Usual Physical Activity Questionnaire (SUPAQ)
- Table 32. Techumseh Occupational Physical Activity Questionnaire (TOQ)
- Table 33. Walking Adherence Questionnaire
- Table 34. Yale Physical Activity Survey (YPAS)
- Table 35. Zutphen Physical Activity Questionnaire (ZPAQ)
- Abbreviations of Terms
- References
Table 1. Validation Studies of the Ainsworth New Physical Activity Questionnaire (N-PAQ)
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Ainsworth et al, 2000(1) |
Relationships between N-PAQ and PA log (PAL), CSA monitor derived counts/d and moderate intensity scores using equations from: Freedson-F, Hendelman-H and Schwartz-S (Spearman’s rank order correlation coefficients) |
83 adults (38 men and 45 women); ages NS |
| N-PAQ |
F |
H |
S |
CSA c/d |
PAL |
| Non-occupational walking |
0.41** |
0.05 |
0.11 |
0.28* |
0.38** |
| Non-occupational walking +moderate |
0.26* |
0.11 |
0.19 |
0.26* |
0.54** |
* p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01 *** p < 0.001 |
[Return to the Top]
Table 2. Validation Studies of the Arizona Activity Frequency Questionnaire (AAFQ)
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Staten et al. 2001(2) |
Relation between 28-d and 7-d AAFQ and Physical activity energy expenditure (PAEE) and Total energy Expenditure (TEE) calculated from DLW and measured RMR (Pearson correlations) -- NS between 7-d and 28 dy AAFQ |
35 sedentary women; 31-60 years of age |
| Expenditure
Measure (kJ/d) |
Mean+SD |
| RMR |
4267 ± 687 |
| DLW TEE |
9847 ± 2555 |
| DLW PAEE |
5578 ± 2084 |
| 28-d AAFQ
-total MET |
44.5 ± 10.1 |
| PAEE-indirect calorimetry |
3645 ± 1916 |
| TEE--indirect calorimetry |
7912 ± 2196 |
| TEE reporting accuracy
(AAFQic vs DLW) |
-17.8 ± 20.6 |
| -PAEE- Miffen et al |
4838 ± 2498 |
| -TEE-Miffen et al |
10,544 ± 2814 |
| -TEE reporting accuracy
(AAFQmif vs DLW) |
9.5 ± 24.6 |
| -PAEE MET conversion |
6117 ± 3270 |
| -TEE MET conversion |
13,445 ± 4342 |
| -TEE reporting accuracy
(AAFQmet vs DLW) |
37.3 ± 29.0 |
The AAFQ TEE was significantly correlated with TEE from DLW when the RMR was calculated
using the Mifflin et al. equation or MET conversion technique (r2=0.45 and
r2=0.58). P-values not given in table.
Summary Legend:
PAEE = Physical activity energy expenditure
TEE = Total energy Expenditure
|
[Return to the Top]
Table 3. Validation Studies of the Allied Dunbar National Fitness Survey (ADNFS)
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Brownbill et al. 2002(3) |
Relation between past physical Activity (ADNFS) and BMD by DPX-MD and walking speed (in hallway), and stair climbing (two sample t-tests) |
136 generally healthy Caucasian women;
57.4-88.6 years of age |
No significant differences in BMD between brisk walking speed, stair climbing and past physical activity (ADNFS) |
[Return to the Top]
Table 4. Auckland Heart Study (AHS) Physical Activity Questionnaire
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Elley et al. 2003(4) |
Relation between the AHS PAQ administered twice, and a 7-day activity diary (7-d AD) and pedometer (PED) (Spearman’s correlation coefficients) |
34 “less active” old men and women; 10% Maori, 90% European; 40-79 years of age |
| |
7-d AD |
PED |
| 1st AHS |
| TEE |
0.59 |
0.22 |
| Total Moderate |
0.50** |
0.37* |
| Leisure Moderate |
0.52** |
|
| Leisure vigorous |
0.39** |
|
| 2nd AHS |
| TEE |
0.74*** |
0.49*** |
| Total moderate
activity |
0.72*** |
0.51*** |
| Leisure moderate |
0.59*** |
|
| Leisure vigorous |
0.65*** |
|
* p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01 *** p < 0.001 |
[Return to the Top]
Table 5. Validation Studies of the Baecke Activity Questionnaire (BAQ)
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Philippaerts et al 1999(5) |
Relation of the BAQ and 2 other PAQs to physical activity level (PAL) and average daily metabolic rate (ADMR) as measured with DLW (Pearson correlations) |
19 Flemish males aged 40 years of age |
| |
ADMR |
PAL |
BAQ |
-work index |
0.37 |
0.52* |
sport index |
0.46* |
0.55* |
-leisure time
index |
0.50* |
0.22 |
-total activity
index |
0.68** |
0.69*** |
* p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01 *** p < 0.001 |
| Philippaerts and Lefevre 1998(6) |
Relation of physical activity between 3 levels of professional status of the BAQ and 2 other PAQs (the TCQ and FCQ) Relation of principal-components of BAQ and 2 other PAQs (component loading matrix)- no p values provided |
90 Flemish males; 30, 35 and 40 years of age |
| Component |
BAQ |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
-Work index |
0.70 |
0.09 |
0.03 |
-0.03 |
0.24 |
-0.41 |
-Total activity
index |
0.23 |
0.87 |
0.15 |
-0.02 |
0.23 |
-0.06 |
-Leisure time
index |
-0.09 |
0.60 |
0.10 |
0.20 |
0.20 |
-0.04 |
Work index of BAQ (0.70) scored high loadings and can be interpreted as a dimension of PA at work. BAQ total activity index (0.87) and leisure time index (0.60) loaded highly with physical activity during sports activities |
| Pols et al 1996(7) |
Relation between BAQ and EPIC PAQ to a physical activity diary (12 d) as the main reference method, a single 24-h Caltrac accelerometer score, and energy intake estimated from a 24-h dietary recall repeated 12 times (Pearson correlation) |
33 women; 51-71 years of age |
| |
BAQ |
Pre-EPIC |
0.45* |
Diary |
0.51* |
Caltrac |
0.22 |
EI-recall |
-0.21 |
* p < 0.05 |
| Richardson et al 1995(8) |
Relation between BAQ And peak oxygen consumption (VO2 pk), % Body fat (%BF), Caltrac accelerometer and 48 hr diaries (PA) (Pearson partial correlations adjusted for age) |
28 men and 50 women- Caucasian- in the ‘The Athero-sclerosis Risk in Communities’ (ARIC); 20-59 years of age |
| |
VO2 pk |
%BF |
Caltrac |
Men: |
Leisure |
0.13 |
-0.05 |
-0.05 |
Total |
0.57* |
-0.30 |
0.24 |
Women: |
Leisure |
0.38* |
-.51* |
0.06 |
Total |
0.46* |
-0.51* |
0.19 |
* p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01 *** p < 0.001 |
| Miller et al 1994(9) |
Relationship between BAQ and kcal estimates from Caltrac accelerometer and 2 other PAQs
(correlations) |
26 women and 7 men-Physical Therapists-mean age 28±6 years |
Caltrac |
0.40 |
3-day record |
0.13 |
7-day recall |
0.07 |
Godin |
0.61** |
NASA |
0.54 |
* p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01 *** p < 0.001 |
| Jacobs et al 1993(10) |
Relationships between BAQ and VO2 max, % body fat (%BF), Caltrac accelerometer (CAL) and 4 wk activity history (FWH) (Spearman correlations) |
28 men and 50 women-Caucasian-20-59 years of age. |
| |
VO2 max |
%BF |
CAL |
FWH |
Total |
0.54 |
-0.49 |
0.19 |
0.37* |
Work |
0.23 |
-0.17 |
0.11 |
0.05 |
Leisure |
0.26* |
-0.39* |
0.01 |
0.28* |
* p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01 *** p < 0.001 |
| Ainsworth et al 1993(11) |
Relationships between Baecke Occupational question and PA record scores (activity units) and other PAQs.
(Age- and gender-adjusted correlation coefficients) |
65 men and women; 23 to 59 years of age |
PA Record Scores
(activity units) |
.74 |
TOQ |
.09 |
HIP |
.38 |
Lipid Res Clinics |
.45 |
Minn Heart Health |
.16 |
Cardia |
.02 |
|
| Rauh et al 1992(12) |
Relationship between items on the Baecke and Caltrac
(Pearson correlations) |
45 Latino (Spanish/English-speaking) adults, 53% male; mean age 33 years |
Baecke: |
Work |
0.42* |
Sport |
0.39* |
Leisure |
0.41* |
* p < 0.05 |
| Albanes et al 1990(13) |
Relationship between BAQ and EI, REE and 7 other PAQs (Spearman correlations) |
21 men; 28-55 years of age |
EE |
0.38 |
EI-REE |
0.21 |
5-City Project |
0.16 |
Framingham |
0.57 |
Minn Leisure Time |
0.36 |
Health Insurance Plan |
0.78 |
Lipid Res Clinics |
0.68 |
Paffenbarger: |
Harvard U. Alumni |
0.56 |
U. Penn Alumni |
0.59 |
(No P-values provided) |
[Return to the Top]
Table 6. Modified Baecke Questionnaire (MBAQ)
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Bonnefoy et al 2001(14) |
Relationships between MBAQ and DLW and maximal oxygen uptake (VO2 max)
(Pearson and Spearman's correlation coefficients) |
19 men; mean age 73.4 ± 4.1 years |
| |
DLW-TEE |
VO2 max |
MBAQ: |
-Questionnaire
score |
0.21(0.28) |
0.32(0.11) |
all NS
Spearman's correlation coefficients in parenthesis |
| Pols et al 1995(15) |
Relationship between MBAQ and 3-day activity diary at two times (Pearson correlations and tertile % agreement (Agrmnt) |
64 Dutch men and 62 Dutch women ages 20-70 years of age |
| |
Pearson |
Agrmnt % |
Men |
Time 1 |
0.56* |
56.7 |
Time 2 |
0.66* |
58.3 |
Women |
Time 1 |
0.44* |
40.0% |
Time 2 |
0.42 |
44.0% |
* p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01 *** p < 0.001 |
| Voorrips et al 1991(16) |
Relationship between MBAQ total activity score and the average of 3-24 hr activity recalls over a 3-wk period and pedometer (PED) (3 consecutive days) |
14 men and 17 women- healthy and indepen-dently living; 63-80 years of age |
| |
24 hr |
PED |
MBAQ |
Total activity
score: |
0.78 |
0.72 |
|
[Return to the Top]
Table 7. Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System- New Walking Module
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Yore et al 2004
(Abstract)(17) |
Relationships between BRFSSA PA module and activity logs in two studies: 1) Participants answered the survey 4 times (twice in-person and twice by telephone) and completed an activity log for 3 weeks, and 2) participants answered the survey 3 times by telephone and completed an activity log for 1 week. |
Study 1 (n = 92) conducted in 1998-1999, Study 2 (n = 60) was conducted in 2000-2001; for both, partici-pants were 50% female, 80% white; mean age of 45 years |
Abstract summary: In Study 1, 29% reported recommended walking on the BRFSS survey and 50% reported recommended walking on the log, concurrent validity kappa = 0.07. In Study 2 48% reported recommended walking on the BRFSS survey and 38% reported recommended walking on the log (k = .19). The concurrent validity of these questions is poor (K<0.2) |
[Return to the Top]
Table 8. Campbell Survey on Well-Being in Canada Physical Activity Monitor (PAM)
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Craig et al 2002(18) |
Relationship of PAM to predicted VO2 max from step-test, BMI and self reported work and chore demands (Spearman correlation coefficients controlling for age and sex) |
69 males and 66 females; mean age 42.6 ± 2.1 years |
| |
Predict VO2 max |
BMI |
Work |
Chores |
Total |
0.36*** |
0.34*** |
0.37*** |
0.36*** |
Male |
0.30* |
0.31* |
0.33* |
0.30* |
Female |
0.42** |
0.39** |
0.42** |
0.41** |
Age <45 |
0.43*** |
0.45** |
0.43** |
0.43*** |
Age≥45 |
0.34** |
0.28@ |
0.36** |
0.34** |
@p < 0.05 * p < 0.01 ** p < 0.001 *** p < 0.0001 |
[Return to the Top]
Table 9. Central Sweden Physical Activity Questionnaire (CSPAQ)
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Norman et al 2001(19) |
Relationship of CSPAQ to two 7-day activity records |
111 men; 44-78 years of age |
| |
SC |
C |
SD |
44-64 years |
0.63 |
0.63 |
0.65 |
65-78 years |
0.47 |
0.38 |
0.50 |
BMI<26 |
0.68* |
0.66* |
0.73* |
BMI>26 |
0.37 |
0.37 |
0.39 |
* p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01 *** p < 0.001
Summary Legend:
SC = Spearman correlations
C = Concordance
SD = Spearman adjusted for within and between-person variation in the record
|
[Return to the Top]
Table 10. CARDIA Physical Activity Questionnaire
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Jacobs et al 1993(20) |
Relationships between CARDIA and VO2 max (Spearman correlations) |
28 men and 50 women-Caucasian; 20-59 years of age. |
| |
VO2 max |
%BF |
CAL |
FWH |
Moderate |
0.08 |
-0.09 |
0.11 |
0.08 |
Summary Legend:
%BF = % body fat
CAL = Caltrac accelerometer
FWH = 4 wk activity history
|
[Return to the Top]
Table 11. CHAMPS Activities Questionnaire for Older Adults
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Resnicow et al 2003(21) |
Relationship between modified CHAMPS (and 3 other questionnaires) and
Estimated VO2 max and BMI (Pearson Correlations) |
138-African-American men and women (78% female) in the Healthy Body/Healthy Spirit Trial; 21-68 years of age |
| Age |
VO2 |
BMI |
21-39 years |
-all activities |
0.31** |
0.08 |
-mod/vigorous |
0.35** |
0.11 |
40+ years |
-all activities |
0.05** |
-0.02 |
-mod/vigorous |
-0.00** |
0.03 |
Men |
-all activities |
0.42* |
0.15 |
-mod/vigorous |
0.43* |
0.19 |
Women |
-all activities |
0.07 |
-0.01 |
-mod/vigorous |
0.05 |
0.02 |
* p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01 |
| Stewart et al 2001(22) |
Relationship of CHAMPS moderate and greater (M) intensity measures and All activities measures (ALL) of EE and Frequency/week (FW), to physical activity measures and physical functioning measures (Pearson Correlations) |
173 men and women from CHAMPS intervention trial (86 intervention and 87 control) plus 76 from the community; 65-90 years of age |
| |
EE-M |
FW-M |
EE-ALL |
FW-ALL |
BMI |
-0.06 |
-0.17** |
0.04 |
-0.21** |
LBF |
0.28** |
0.20** |
0.27** |
0.15 |
6-mw |
0.27** |
0.21*** |
0.22*** |
0.10 |
| PF |
0.30*** |
0.30*** |
0.27*** |
0.23*** |
EF |
0.20** |
0.23*** |
0.17** |
0.14* |
P |
0.11 |
0.17** |
0.07 |
0.08 |
WB |
0.09 |
0.14** |
0.05 |
0.02 |
* p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01 *** p < 0.001
Summary Legend:
BMI = Body Mass Index
LBF = Low body functioning
6-mw = 6-min walk
PF = Self-reported physical functioning
EF = Self-reported energy/fatigue
P = Self reported Pain
WB = Self reported Psychological well-being
|
| Harada et al 2001(23) |
Relationship between CHAMPS - moderate and all activities (Pearson Correlations) |
87 older adults; 61% Japanese American, 34% white, 5% African American; 65-89 years of age |
| |
CHAMPS All activities |
CHAMPS moderate |
| (All Subjects) |
ML- |
|
|
| ankle |
0.36** |
0.42** |
| waist |
0.42*** |
0.48*** |
EPESE-
LBF |
0.46** |
0.44** |
6-M |
0.46** |
0.54** |
BMI |
0.006 |
-0.02 |
PF |
0.39** |
0.41** |
GH |
0.35** |
0.42** |
MH |
0.25** |
0.28** |
P |
0.26** |
0.28** |
** p < 0.01 *** p < 0.001
Summary Legend:
ML = Mini-logger Activity monitor
EPESE = a short physical performance battery
LBF = lower body functioning
6-M = 6-minute walk
BMI = Body Mass Index
PF = Self-report physical functioning
GH = Self-report general health perceptions
MH = Self-report mental health
P = Pain
|
[Return to the Top]
Table 12. European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) Physical Activity Questions
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Wareham et al 2003(24) |
Relationship of EPIC Physical Activity Index (PAI), and physical activity ratio (PAR) calculated from 4-day heart-rate monitoring; VO2 max, energy intake/BMR assessed by 7-day food diaries (EI/BMR). |
173 men and women; 40 to 65 years of age |
| Physical Activity Index (EPIC) |
| |
Inactive |
Mod Inactive |
Mod active |
Active |
PAR* |
2.34 |
2.25 |
2.45 |
2.6 |
VO2 max** |
26 |
28 |
30 |
31 |
EI/BMR Men |
1.26 |
1.3 |
1.33 |
1.42 |
* p for trend 0.003
** p for trend 0.001 |
| Pols et al 1997(25) |
Relationship between EPIC PAQ items and 3-day activity diary, repeated four times (Spearman correlation) |
126 men and women; 20 and 70 years of age |
| |
Men |
Women |
| |
1st diary |
3rd diary |
1st diary |
3rd diary |
Walking |
0.32 |
0.26 |
0.33 |
0.33 |
Cycling |
0.46 |
0.48 |
0.48 |
0.49 |
No p values |
| Pols et al 1997(26) |
Relationship between pre-EPIC PAQ repeated 3 times, and four-times-repeated 3-day activity diary
(Spearman correlation) |
126 Dutch adults; 64 men, 62 women; 21-59 years of age |
| |
1st EPIC PAQ |
3rd EPIC PAQ |
Men |
0.66
(0.49-0.78) |
0.51
(0.28-0.68) |
Women |
0.43
(-0.18-0.63) |
0.44
(0.20-0.64) |
|
| Pols et al 1996(27) |
Relation between pre-EPIC PAQ and BAQ to a physical activity diary (12 d) as the main reference method, a single 24-h Caltrac accelerometer score, and energy intake estimated from a 24-h dietary recall repeated 12 times (Pearson correlation) |
33 women; 51-71 years of age |
| |
Pre-EPIC |
BAQ |
77% agreement for classification below and above mean |
Diary |
0.64* |
Caltrac |
0.22 |
EI-recall |
-0.43* |
* p < 0.05 |
[Return to the Top]
Table 13. European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition-Norfolk (EPIC2) Physical Activity Questions
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Wareham et al 2002(28) |
Relationship between ERIC-2 variables and Physical Activity Index (PAI), and four separate episodes of 4-day heart-rate monitoring (to obtain EE)and four repeated measures of sub-maximum oxygen uptake (to obtain mean VO2 max)
(Pearson correlations adjusted for age and sex) |
84 men (mean age 58.8 years) and 89 women (mean age 55.4 years) enrolled in European Prospec-tive Investiga-tion into Cancer Study-Norfolk cohort (EPIC-Norfolk) |
| |
EE (kj/h) |
Mean VO2 max |
PAR >5 (%) |
EPIC-2
Variables: |
Activity/home |
-0.04 |
0.09 |
-0.12 |
Activity/Work |
0.17* |
0.01 |
-0.17 |
Recreational
Activity |
0.13 |
0.16* |
-0.20** |
PAI |
0.28** |
0.15* |
0.05 |
* p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01 *** p < 0.001 |
[Return to the Top]
Table 14a. Health Insurance Plan of New York City (HIP) Activity Questionnaire
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Ainsworth et al 1993(11) |
Relationship between HIP Occupational Index and PA record scores (activity units) and other PAQs.
(age- and gender-adjusted correlation coefficients) |
65 men and women; 23 to 59 years of age |
| PA Record Scores
(activity units) |
.83 |
| Lipid Res Clinics |
.31 |
| Minn Heart Health |
.26 |
| Cardia |
.12 |
| Baecke |
.38 |
|
| Albanes et al 1990(13) |
Relationship between HIP total activity index, past-week kcal and EI, and summary estimates from other PAQs
(Spearman correlations) |
21 USDA employees;28-55 years of age |
| EI |
0.19 |
| EI-REE |
0.05 |
| 5-City Project |
0.40 |
| Framinham |
0.75 |
| Minn Leisure |
0.52 |
| Lipid Res Clinics |
0.68 |
| Baecke |
0.78 |
| Paffenbarger: |
| Harvard U. Alumni |
0.53 |
| U. Penn Alumni |
0.77 |
(No P-values provided) |
| Leon at al 1981(29) |
Relationship between Occupational PA using HIP job classification and treadmill duration performance |
175 men from MRFIT cohort screening population; 36-59 years of age |
| HIP job class |
0.070 |
| HIP job class
-light to moderate |
0.028 |
| job sweat |
0.118 |
all ns |
[Return to the Top]
Table 14b. Historical Leisure Activity Questionnaire (HLAQ)
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Chasan-Taber 2002(30) |
Relationship between Modified HLAQ (to collect past year) and four 1-wk activity logs (PAL); attenuated (r) and deattenuated (rd) Pearson coefficients between each questionnaire and the average of up to four 1 wk PALs |
131 women |
| |
Baseline HLAQ and average of PALs |
Follow-up HLAQ and
average of PALs |
| |
r |
rd |
r |
rd |
| Total activity |
0.24* |
0.28* |
0.26* |
0.29* |
| Moderate |
0.18* |
0.23* |
0.15 |
0.16 |
| Vigorous |
0.52* |
0.62* |
0.52* |
0.63* |
| Age<50 yr (N=64) |
| Total activity |
|
|
0.31* |
|
| Moderate |
|
|
0.16 |
|
| Vigorous |
|
|
0.58** |
|
| Age≥50 yr (N=67) |
| Total activity |
|
|
0.19 |
|
| Moderate |
|
|
0.12 |
|
| Vigorous |
|
|
0.47** |
|
* p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01 |
| Gregg et al 1999(31) |
Relation of HLAQ and MNLTPAQ and Quantitative ultrasound (QUS), assessment of bone speed of sound (SOS) and broadband ultrasound attenuation (BUA) and bone mineral density (BMD)
ANOVA |
393 women; 45-53 years of age |
| |
PA |
PA |
PA |
| At ages: |
14-21y |
22-35y |
35y |
| BUA |
-0.32 |
-0.73 |
0.72 |
| p-value |
0.73 |
0.52 |
0.48 |
| SOS |
0.34 |
0.74 |
1.00 |
| p-value |
0.42 |
0.14 |
0.02 |
| Femoral Neck
BMD |
0.003 |
0.016 |
0.018 |
| p-value |
0.58 |
0.04 |
0.006 |
Summary Legend:
QUS = Quantitative ultrasound
SOS = Assessment of bone speed of sound
BUA = Broadband ultrasound attenuation
BMD = Bone mineral density
|
| Kriska et al 1988(32) |
Relationship between Historical Physical Activity Survey (HPAS) and current PA (using Paffenbarger (Paf) and Large Scale Integrated Motor Activity Monitor (LSI)
Relationship between Historical Physical Activity Survey (HPAS) and baseline bone measurements
(Pearson Correlations) |
223 postmenopausal women |
Current PA Measures
| |
HPAS (kcals/wk) |
| |
Include walking |
Exlcude
walking |
| Paf |
| Mean blocks walked/d |
0.22** |
0.09 |
| Sport index |
0.41** |
0.46** |
| Kcals expended/wk |
0.41** |
0.38** |
| LSI |
| Day counts/hr |
0.12* |
0.13* |
| Evening counts/hr |
0.01 |
0.03 |
| Grip strength |
0.19* |
0.23** |
Relation between HPAS and Baseline Bone measures:
| Age period (years) |
Area |
Density |
| 14-21 |
0.14* |
0.10 |
| 22-34 |
0.09 |
0.14* |
| 35-50 |
0.14* |
0.17** |
| 50+ |
0.06 |
0.09 |
| Total historical activity |
0.16* |
0.16 |
* p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01
Summary Legend:
HPAS = Historical Physical Activity Survey
Paf = Current PA (using Paffenbarger)
LSI = Large Scale Integrated Motor Activity Monitor
|
[Return to the Top]
Table 15. International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ)
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Craig et al. 2003(33) |
Relation between Short, last 7 day, telephone (S7T), Short, last 7 day, self-administered (S7S,) Short usual week, telephone (SUT), Short, usual week, self-administered (SUS), Long, last 7 day, telephone (L7T), Long, last 7 day, self-administered (L7S,) Long usual week, telephone (LUT), Long, usual week, self-administered (LUS) versions of (IPAQ) and CSA accelerometer total counts per registered time.
*LUI, SUI left undefined
(Spearman’s coefficients) |
Adults from 14 centers in 10 countries (BRA UK, FIN, USA1, USA2, NET, SW GU, SA, AUS, JAP 18- to 65-years of age. |
| |
Site |
Total PA |
Total PA Using pace |
Total PA Excl slow pace |
ACC >150 min/wk |
| IPAQ Long
Forms: |
| L7S |
UK1 |
0.43 |
0.42 |
0.38 |
0.83 |
| FIN |
0.52 |
0.52 |
0.49 |
0.89 |
| USA1 |
0.05 |
0.05 |
0.06 |
0.31 |
| USA2 |
0.32 |
0.36 |
0.34 |
0.81 |
| NET |
0.38 |
0.37 |
0.38 |
1.0 |
| SW |
0.24 |
0.25 |
0.29 |
0.82 |
| LUT |
USA2 |
0.52 |
0.52 |
0.52 |
0.86 |
| GU |
0.59 |
0.59 |
0.57 |
0.80 |
| GU |
0.61 |
0.62 |
0.60 |
0.80 |
| GU |
0.39 |
0.43 |
0.41 |
0.75 |
| LUI* |
SA |
0.52 |
0.52 |
0.51 |
0.86 |
| SA |
0.46 |
0.45 |
0.44 |
0.85 |
| LUS |
JAP |
0.36 |
0.36 |
0.33 |
0.72 |
| USA1 |
-0.02 |
-0.01 |
0.02 |
0.35 |
| BRA |
-0.27 |
-0.26 |
-0.31 |
0.46 |
| IPAQ Short
Forms: |
| S7T |
AUS |
0.12 |
0.14 |
0.23 |
0.74 |
| S7S |
FIN |
0.47 |
0.49 |
0.51 |
0.88 |
| USA1 |
0.26 |
0.27 |
0.25 |
0.46 |
| USA2 |
0.27 |
0.27 |
0.28 |
0.81 |
| NET |
0.32 |
0.30 |
0.34 |
0.93 |
| SW |
0.02 |
0.02 |
0.14 |
0.71 |
| UK1 |
0.40 |
0.40 |
0.38 |
0.81 |
| SUT |
USA2 |
0.57 |
0.57 |
0.57 |
0.86 |
| SUI* |
GU |
0.54 |
0.36 |
0.43 |
0.79 |
| GU |
0.45 |
0.45 |
0.01 |
0.77 |
| GU |
0.42 |
0.45 |
0.37 |
0.80 |
| SA |
0.45 |
0.45 |
0.43 |
0.85 |
| SA |
0.37 |
0.45 |
0.33 |
0.84 |
| SUS |
JAP |
0.32 |
0.45 |
0.30 |
0.65 |
| USA1 |
0.13 |
0.45 |
0.13 |
0.50 |
| BRA |
0.12 |
0.45 |
0.17 |
0.75 |
No p values provided
Summary Legend:
S7T = Short, last 7 day, telephone
S7S = Short, last 7 day, self-administered
SUT = Short, usual week, telephone
SUS = Short, usual week, self-administered
L7T = Long, last 7 day, telephone
L7S = Long, last 7 day, self-administered
LUT = Long, usual week, telephone
LUS = Long, usual week, self-administered
|
[Return to the Top]
Table 16. Kaiser Physical Activity Survey (KPAS)
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Ainsworth et al 2000(34) |
Relationship between KPAS physical Activity Scores (PAS) and Caltrac accelerometer and PA records; cardio respiratory fitness (VO2 peak) and % body fat; PA records for two 7-d periods, separated by 1 month
(Spearman correlations) |
50 women; 20-60 years of age |
| |
KPAS-PAS
Occupational |
Active Living |
| Indirect: |
| VO2 peak |
0.04 |
0.37 |
| % body fat |
-0.06 |
-0.41 |
| Direct: |
| PA record |
0.35 |
.22 |
| Direct: |
| Caltrac-Kcal/d |
0.30 |
-0.21 |
| MET/min/d |
0.16 |
0.34 |
| PA record: |
| -walking |
0.50 |
|
| -walk/cycle transport |
|
0.04 |
| -walk + 15 min |
|
0.33 |
| -bicycle+15 min |
|
0.43 |
correlations>0.28 are p < 0.05; correlations>0.35 are p < 0.01
Summary Legend:
PAS = KPAS Physical Activity Scores
VO2 peak = Cardio respiratory fitness
|
[Return to the Top]
Table 17. Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam (LASA)-Physical Activity Questionnaire (LAPAQ)
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Stel et al 2004(35) |
Relation between LAPAQ and 7-day diary and pedometer |
439 older persons; 69-92 years of age |
| |
Correlation of LAPAQ and 7-day Diary |
| Total activity |
0.68* |
| Walking |
0.50* |
| Bicycling |
0.84* |
| |
Correlation of LAPAQ and Pedometer |
| All subjects |
0.43* |
| Cyclists and
Swimmers excluded |
0.56* |
* p < 0.001 |
[Return to the Top]
Table 18. Minnesota Leisure-time Physical activity questionnaire (MLTPAQ)
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Walsh et al 2004(36) |
Relation of TEE calculated from MLTPAQ and the Tecumseh Occupational questionnaire (TEC), to body composition (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry), and free-living TEE (DLW) (ANOVA) |
20 white and 21 black premeno-pausal women (over-weight, weight reduced and control); 20-46 years of age; 20 white and 14 black control women |
Overestimation of EE (kcals/dy)-differences between TEC/ MNLTPAQ combined, and DLW
| Overweight* |
| Black |
981±284 |
| White |
869±388 |
| Weight reduced* |
| Black |
1016±521* |
| White |
449±279 |
| Control |
| Black |
551±375 |
| White |
670±365 |
* p < 0.05
Relation between % body fat with over-estimation of EE by TEC/MNLTPAQ
| Overweight |
0.39* |
| Weight reduced |
NS |
| Controls |
NS |
(NS-correlations not given) |
| Conway et al 2002(37) |
Relation between a 4-wk history version of the MLTPAQ and the TEC and doubly labeled water (DLW) |
24 males; 42.0 ± 2.3 years of age |
Mean estimates of EE from questionnaires and DLW
| |
Mean |
R2 |
| EE MLTPAQ |
3.03±0.41 |
|
| EE TEC |
8.47±0.78 |
|
| EESLEEPMET |
2.29±0.09 |
|
| EE GEN |
1.17±0.12 |
|
| EEDLW |
13.55±0.38 |
|
| EE total 1 |
13.79±0.89 |
0.38** |
| EE total 2 |
14.87±0.90 |
0.39** |
EE total 1= EE MLTPAQ+ EE TEC EESLEEPMET
EE total2= EE MLTPAQ+ EE TEC EESLEEPMET+ EE GEN
** p < 0.001 |
| Tuero et al 2001(38) |
Relation between MLTPAQ and fitness indicators: VO2 max and % BF (correlation coefficients) |
44 male and 38 females, Hispanic; 18-59 years of age |
| MLTPAQ |
Baseline |
12 month |
| |
V02 max |
BF |
VO2 max |
BF |
| Light |
-0.119 |
0.166 |
-0.223 |
0.196 |
| Moderate |
0.163 |
0.198 |
-0.117 |
0.95 |
| Heavy |
0.586* |
-0.287* |
-0.494* |
0.242* |
| Total |
0.190 |
-0.019 |
0.064 |
0.039 |
* p < 0.001 |
| Bonnefoy et al 2001(39) |
Relationships between MLTPAQ and DLW and maximal oxygen uptake (VO2 max)
(Pearson and Spearman’s Correlation coefficients) |
19 men; mean age 73.4 ± 4.1 years |
| MLTPAQ: |
DLW-TEE |
VO2 max |
| -light intensity |
-0.15(-0.24) |
-0.05(-0.07) |
| -Moderate intensity |
0.05*(0.19) |
0.30(0.15) |
| -Heavy intensity |
0.28(0.47)* |
0.50*(0.54)* |
| -Total |
0.23(0.17) |
0.48*(0.38) |
* p <0.05
Spearman’s correlation coefficients in parenthesis |
| Elosua et al 2000(40) |
Relation between EE in PA obtained by MLTPAQ and BMI, HR at rest, after 3 min of exercise test and after 6 min of exercise test.
(Spearman correlation coefficients) |
250 Spanish women; 18-60 years of age |
| EE-PA: |
BMI |
HR |
HR-3 |
HR-6 |
ET |
| Total |
-0.129* |
-0.078 |
-0.214* |
-0.175* |
0.395* |
| -heavy |
-0.199* |
-0.158* |
-0.335 |
-0.283* |
-0.508* |
| -moderate |
-0.061 |
0.003 |
0.018 |
0.001 |
0.129* |
| -light |
-0.092 |
0.023 |
0.017 |
0.029 |
-0.017 |
| -household |
-0.268* |
0.034 |
0.139 |
0.105 |
-0.305* |
* p < 0.05 |
| Starling et al 1999(41) |
Relation between Yale Physical Activity Survey (YPAS) and MLTPAQ and Caltrac uniaxial accelerometer, and doubly labeled water (DLW) in conjunction with indirect calorimetry (ANOVA) |
35 women and 32 men; 45- to 84years of age |
| Method: |
Physical Activity EE (kcals/d) |
| DLW |
| -men |
1211±429 |
| -women |
873±244 |
| MLTPAQ |
| -men |
459±288* |
| -women |
386±228* |
| CALTRAC |
| -men |
554±242* |
| -women |
379±162* |
* p < 0.05 compared with DLW |
| Richardson et al 1994(42) |
Relation between MLTPAQ and six 48-hour physical activity records, fourteen 48-hour Caltrac accelerometer readings, 3 VO2 peak determinations and percent body fat (%BF)
(Age- and gender-adjusted Pearson partial correlation coefficients) |
78 men and women; 20-59 years of age |
| |
T |
H |
M |
L |
HH |
| %BF |
-0.24* |
-0.24* |
-0.01 |
-0.15 |
-0.01 |
| (n) |
(75) |
(76) |
(76) |
(76) |
(75) |
| V02peak |
0.47** |
0.43** |
0.14 |
0.27* |
0.14 |
| (n) |
(75) |
(76) |
(76) |
(76) |
(75) |
* p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01
Summary Legend:
T = Total
L = Light
M = Moderate
H = Heavy
HH = Household
%BF = Percent Body Fat
VO2 max = vital capacity
|
| Jacobs et al 1993(10) |
Relation between MLTPAQ and 9 other PAQs, and treadmill exercise performance and vital capacity (VO2 max, Forced Expiratory Volume(FEV), work load), body fatness, the average of 14 4-wk physical activity histories (4WH) and the average of 14 2-d accelerometer readings (Caltrac)
(age-adjusted correlation coefficients) |
78 men and women; 20-59 years of age |
| MLTPAQ |
| |
T |
L |
M |
H |
HH |
| CALTRAC |
| -kcal/d |
-0.06 |
-0.04 |
0.02 |
-0.01 |
0.08 |
| -min/d |
0.18 |
0.07 |
0.22 |
0.16 |
0.03 |
| 4WH |
| - T |
0.74 |
0.13 |
0.25 |
0.52 |
0.55 |
| -L |
0.27 |
0.83 |
-0.02 |
0.12 |
-0.09 |
| -M |
0.15 |
-0.09 |
0.75 |
0.12 |
-0.03 |
| -H |
0.74 |
0.11 |
0.22 |
0.86 |
0.08 |
| -HH |
0.40 |
-0.10 |
0.03 |
0.06 |
0.74 |
| WORKLOAD |
0.45 |
0.32 |
0.17 |
0.45 |
0.00 |
| %BF |
-0.24 |
-0.08 |
-0.07 |
-0.22 |
-0.08 |
| FEV |
0.09 |
0.10 |
-0.05 |
0.08 |
0.02 |
| V02 |
0.43 |
0.11 |
0.15 |
0.39 |
0.16 |
Summary Legend:
T = Total
L = Light
M = Moderate
H = Heavy
HH = Household
VO2 max = vital capacity
FEV = Forced Expiratory Volume
4WH = the average of 14 4-wk physical activity histories
Caltrac = the average of 14 2-d accelerometer readings
|
| Wilbur et al 1993(43) |
Relationship between MLTPAQ Leisure activities and Cardio respiratory fitness established with a Monarch bicycle ergometer, BP, Ponderosity, and Self Report activity. |
375 women, 73% white, 22% black; 33-63 years of age |
| |
Leisure EE |
| BP: |
| -systolic |
-.00 |
| -diastolic |
-.06 |
| Ponderosity |
-.11* |
| Cardiorespiratory
Fitness |
.21** |
| Self report: |
| Activity compared to
others |
.24*** |
| Overall activity |
.23*** |
* p < 0.05 ** p < 0.001 *** p < 0.0001 |
| Albanes et al 1990(13) |
Relationship between MLTPAQ past-week kcal and EI and summary estimates from other PAQs
(Spearman correlations) |
21 USDA employees;28-55 years of age |
| EI |
0.13 |
| EI-REE |
0.17 |
| 5-City Project |
0.48 |
| Framinham |
0.33 |
| Health Insurance Plan |
0.52 |
| Lipid Res Clinics |
0.63 |
| Paffenbarger: |
| Harvard U. Alumni |
0.54 |
| U. Penn Alumni |
0.47 |
(No P-values provided) |
[Return to the Top]
Table 19. The Modifiable Activity Questionnaire (MAQ)/Pima Indian Questionnaire
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Kriska et al 1990(44) |
Relationships between the MAQ and past wk Caltrac activity monitor (counts/h) at test and retest (Spearman correlations) |
17 Pima Indian men and women; 10- 59 year of age |
| |
Walking included |
Walking excluded |
| |
Test |
retest |
test |
retest |
| Leisure |
| -Past wk |
0.80* |
0.50* |
0.62* |
0.58* |
| -Past yr |
0.69* |
0.27 |
0.44 |
0.32 |
| Occupation |
| -Past yr |
0.41 |
0.41 |
0.41 |
0.41 |
| Total past Wk |
0.59* |
0.66* |
0.53* |
0.60* |
* p < 0.05 |
[Return to the Top]
Table 20. The MONICA Optional Study of Physical Activity (MOSPA-Q)
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Roeykens et al 1998(45) |
Relation between MOSPA-Q items by time scores (i.e. WORK) and EE spent in activity category (i.e. KWORK) and biometrical and physiological parameters: BMI, VO2 peak, LBM, %BF
(Spearman rank order correlation coefficients) |
167 physical education and physical therapy alumni. |
| Physiological and Biometrical Variables |
| MOSPA-Q |
BMI |
VO2 max |
LBM |
% BF |
| Items: |
| Time scores: |
| WORK |
0.081 |
0.210* |
0.201** |
-0.166* |
| TRANS |
0.174* |
0.161* |
0.110 |
-0.133 |
| LTA |
0.043 |
0.29*** |
0.192* |
-0.248 |
| EE: |
| KWORK |
0.081 |
0.216 |
0.199 |
-0.167* |
| KTRANS |
0.176* |
0.167 |
0.111 |
-0.134 |
| KLTA |
0.115 |
0.438*** |
0.370*** |
-0.361*** |
| TEE |
0.304*** |
0.387*** |
0.529*** |
-0.264*** |
* p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01 *** p < 0.001
TRANS - transportation
LTA - Leisure time activity |
[Return to the Top]
Table 21. National Health Interview Survey (NHIS)-walking questions
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Rauh et al 1992(12) |
Relationship between items on the NHIS Walking items and Caltrac
(Pearson correlations) |
45 Latino (Spanish/English-speaking) adults, 53% male; mean age 33 years |
p < 0.05 |
| Hovell et al 1992(46) |
Relationship of the level of change in walking for exercise (walking measured by two items from NHIS: “How many times in the past two weeks did you walk for exercise?” and “About how many minutes did you do the activity each times?”) collected twice over two years, and independent variables measuring “Change in Self-efficacy”
(correlation coefficients) |
1,701 adults, 58% male, 88% Caucasian; 48.25 ± 18.08 years of age |
Significant coefficients for dynamic correlates of Walking for Exercise
| |
B |
p< |
| Change in
Family Support |
.131 |
.0001 |
| Change in
Vigorous PA |
.084 |
.0009 |
| Change in
Heart Healthy Diet |
.074 |
.003 |
| Change in
Self-efficacy |
.069 |
.008 |
| Change in
Friend Support |
.131 |
.0001 |
| Change in
Cigarette Smoking |
-.060 |
.013 |
|
| Weiss et al 1990(47) |
Relationships between NHIS calculated EE and individual questions from the 1985 supplement
(Spearman correlations) |
11,653-32,822 Men and women in the NHIS cohort: aged at least 18 years |
| Activity compared to peers-3 levels (n=32,822) |
0.28* |
| Activity compared to peers-5 levels (n=32,415) |
0.29* |
| Job-related activity (20,789) |
-0.02* |
| Main daily activity (11,653) |
0.22* |
* p < 0.05 |
[Return to the Top]
Table 22. Nurses Health Study II Activity and Inactivity Questionnaire (NHS II-PAQ)
| Reference |
Methods |
Sample |
Summary Results |
| Wolf et al 1994(48) |
Relation between NHS II-PAQ and past-week activity recalls and 7-day activity diaries
(deattenuated correlations adjusted for within-person variation) |
Representative sample of 149 women (84 African American) from NHS II; 39 ± 4.3 years of age |
Correlation of NHS II PAQ verses average response on 4 past week recalls
| |
crude |
deattenuated |
| Representative
Sample |
0.70
(0.60-0.77)* |
| | |
