Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5c569c448b-8lphq Total loading time: 0.375 Render date: 2022-07-03T03:39:23.843Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

The validation of physical activity instruments for measuring energy expenditure: problems and pitfalls

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 1998

Kirsten L Rennie
Affiliation:
Department of Community Medicine, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 2SR, UK
Nicholas J Wareham*
Affiliation:
Department of Community Medicine, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 2SR, UK
*
*Corresponding author: E-mail njw1004@medschl.cam.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract

HTML view is not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Objective:

To review and categorize the problems associated with undertaking physical activity validation studies and to construct a checklist against which any study could be compared.

Results:

The studies reviewed demonstrated problems in defining the dimension of physical activity that is of interest and in the selection of an appropriate comparison technique. Ideally this should be closely related to the true exposure of interest and assess that exposure objectively and without correlated error from the study instrument in question. In many studies inappropriate comparison methods have been chosen which do not measure the true underlying exposure and which are likely to have correlated error. The choice of study populations, the frame of reference of the exposure measurement and the use of appropriate statistical methods are also problematic areas.

Conclusions:

There is no ideal measurement instrument or validation study design that is suitable for all situations. However, the checklist in this paper provides a means whereby the appropriateness of studies already undertaken or at the planning stage can be assessed.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1998

References

1US Department of Health and Human Services. Physical Activity and Health: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, 1996.Google Scholar
2Wareham, N, Rennie, K. The assessment of physical activity in individuals and populations: why try to be more precise about how physical activity is assessed? Int. J. Obesity 1998; 22(S2): S30–8.Google ScholarPubMed
3LaPorte, RE, Montoye, HJ, Caspersen, CJ. Assessment of physical activity in epidemiologic research: problems and prospects. Publ. Health Rep. 1985; 100: 131–46.Google ScholarPubMed
4Drury, TF ed. National Center for Health Statistics. Assessing Physical Fitness and Physical Activity in Population-Based Sutveys. Public Health Service, Washington: US Government Printing Office, 1989.Google Scholar
5Kriska, AM, Caspersen, CJ (eds) A collection of physical activity questionnaires for health-related research. Med. Sci. Sports Exer. 1997; 29(6 Suppl): SlS205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6Armstrong, BK, White, E, Saracci, R. Principles of Exposure Measurement in Epidemiology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994.Google Scholar
7Wong, MY, Day, NE, Wareham, NJ. The design of validation studies II: the multivariate situation. Stat. Med. 1998; in press.Google Scholar
8McCutcheon, AL. Latent class analysis. In: Drury, TF, ed. Assessing Physical Fitness and Physical Activity in Population-based Surveys. Hyattsville, Maryland: National Center for Health Statistics, 1989: 633–49.Google Scholar
9Caspersen, CJ. Physical activity epidemiology: concepts, methods, and applications to exercise science. Exerc. Sports Sci. Rev. 1989; 17: 423–73.Google ScholarPubMed
10Weiss, TW, Slater, CH, Green, LW, Kennedy, VC, Albright, DL, Wun, C. The validity of single-item, self assessment questions as measures of adult physical activity. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1990; 43: 1123–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11Aaron, DJ, Kriska, AM, Dearwater, SR, Cauley, JA, Metz, KF, LaPorte, RE. Reproducibility and validity of an epidemiologic questionnaire to assess past year physical activity in adolescents. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1995; 142: 191201.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12Mayer, EJ, Alderman, BW, Regensteiner, JG et al. Physical activity assessment measures compared in a biethnic population: the San Luis Valley diabetes study. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 1991; 53: 812–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13Singh, PN, Tonstad, S, Abbey, DE, Fraser, GE. Validity of selected physical activity questions in white seventh-day adventists and non-adventists. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 1996; 28: 1026–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14Ainsworth, BE, Jacobs, DR, Leon, AS, Richardson, MT, Montoye, HJ. Assessment of the accuracy of physical activity questionnaire occupational data. JOM 1993; 35: 1017–27.Google ScholarPubMed
15Hopkins, WG, Wilson, NC, Russell, DG. Validation of the physical activity instrument for the life in New Zealand survey. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1991; 133: 7382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16Elosua, R, Marrugat, J, Molina, L, Pons, S, Pujol, E. Validation of the Minnesota leisure time physical activity questionnaire in Spanish men. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1994; 139: 1197–209.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17Booth, ML, Owen, N, Bauman, A, Gore, CJ. Relationship between a 14-day recall measure of leisure-time physical activity and a submaximal test of physical work capacity in a population sample of Australian adults. RQES 1996; 67: 221–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18Knapik, J, Zoltick, J, Rottner, CH et al. Relationships between self-reported physical activity and physical fitness in active men. Am. J. Prev. Med. 1993; 9: 203–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19Suliernan, S. Nelson, M. Validation in London of a physical activity questionnaire for use in a study of postmenopausal osteopaenia. J. Epidemiol. Comm. Health 1997; 51: 365–72.Google Scholar
20Lamb, KL, Brodie, DA. Leisure-time physical activity as an estimate of physical fitness: a validation study. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1991; 44: 4152.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21Siconolfi, SF, Lasater, TM, Snow, RCK, Carleton, RA. Self-reported physical activity compared with maximal oxygen uptake. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1985; 122: 101–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22Jacobs, DR, Ainsworth, BE, Hartman, TJ, Leon, AS. A simultaneous evaluation of 10 commonly used physical activity questionnaires. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 1993; 25: 8191.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23Berthouze, SE, Minaire, PM, Castells, J, Busso, T, Vico, L, Lacour, J. Relationship between mean habitual daily energy expenditure and maximal oxygen uptake. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 1995; 27: 1170–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24Kohl, HW, Blair, SN, Paffenbarger, RS, Macera, CA, Kronenfeld, JJ. A mail survey of physical activity habits as related to measured physical fitness. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1988; 127: 1228–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25Slattery, ML, Jacobs, DR. Assessment of ability to recall physical activity of several years ago. AEP 1995; 5: 292–6.Google ScholarPubMed
26Blair, SN, Kannel, WB, Kohl, HW, Goodyear, N, Wilson, PWF. Surrogate measures of physical activity and physical fitness. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1989; 129: 1145–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
27Washburn, RA, Smith, KW, Goldfield, SRW, McKinlay, JB. Reliability and physiologic correlates of the Harvard alumni activity survey in a general population. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1991; 44: 1319–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28Washburn, RA, Goldfield, SRW, Smith, KW, McKinlay, JB. The validity of self-reported exercise-induced sweating as a measure of physical activity. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1990; 132: 107–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
29Ceesay, SM, Prentice, AM, Day, KC, Murgatroyd, PR, Goldberg, GR, Scott, W. The use of heart rate monitoring in the estimation of energy expenditure: a validation study using indirect whole-body calorimetry. Br. J. Nutr. 1989; 61: 175–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
30Wareham, NJ, Hennings, SJ, Prentice, AM, Day, NE. Feasibility of heart rate monitoring to estimate total level and pattern of energy expenditure in a population-based epidemiological study. Br. J. Nutr. 1997; 78: 889900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31Wareham, NJ, Hennings, SJ, Byrne, CD, Hales, CN, Prentice, AM, Day, NE. A quantitative analysis of the relationship between habitual energy expenditure, fitness and the metabolic cardiovascular syndrome. Br. J. Nutr. 1998; in press.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
32Williams, E, Klesges, RC, Hanson, CL, Eck, LH. A prospective study of the reliability and convergent validity of three physical activity measures in a field research trial. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1989; 42: 1161–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33Kriska, AM, knowler, WC, LaPorte, RE et al. Development of questionnaire to examine relationship of physical activity and diabetes in Pima Indians. Diabetes Care 1990; 13: 401–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
34Richardson, MT, Ainsworth, BE, Wu, H-C, Jacobs, DR, Leon, AS. Ability of the atherosclerosis risk in communities (ARIC)/Baeke questionnaire to assess leisure-time physical activity. Int. J. Epidemiol. 1995; 24: 685–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
35Richardson, MT, Leon, AS, Jacobs, DR, Ainsworth, BE, Serfass, R. Comprehensive evaluation of the Minnesota leisure time physical activity questionnaire. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1994; 47: 271–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
36Miller, DJ, Freedson, PS, Kline, GM. Comparison of activity levels using the Caltrac accelerometer and five questionnaires. Med. Sci. Sports. Exerc. 1994; 26: 376382.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
37Pols, MA, Peeters, PHM, Kemper, HCG, Collette, HJA. Repeatability and relative validity of two physical activity questionnaires in elderly women. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 1996; 28: 1020–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
38Montoye, HJ, Kemper, HCG, Saris, WHM, Washburn, RA. Measuring Physical Activity and Energy Erpenditure. Human Kinetics, 1996: 7989.Google Scholar
39Sequeira, MM, Rickenbach, M, Wietlisbach, V, Tullen, B, Schutz, Y. Physical activity assessment using a pedometer and its comparison with a questionnaire in a large population survey. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1995; 142: 989–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
40Pols, MA, Peeters, PHM, Bueno-de-Mesquita, BH et al. Validity and repeatability of a modified Baecke questionnaire on physical activity. Int. J. Epidemiol. 1995; 24: 381–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
41Taylor, CB, Coffey, T, Berra, K, Iaffaldano, R, Casey, K, Haskell, WL. Seven-day activity and self-report compared to a direct measure of physical activity. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1984; 120: 818–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
42Schuit, AJ, Schouten, EG, Westerup, KR, Saris, WHM. Validity of the Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly (PASE): according to energy expenditure assessed by the doubly labeled water method. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1997; 50: 541–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
43Schulz, LO, Harper, IT, Smith, CJ, Kriska, AM, Ravussin, E. Energy intake and physical activity in Pima Indians: comparison with energy expenditure measured by doubly-labeled water. Obesity Res. 1994; 2: 541–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
44Wolf, AM, Hunter, DJ, Colditz, GA et al. Reproducibility and validity of a self-administered physical activity questionnaire. Int. J. Epidemiol. 1994; 23: 991–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
45Albanes, D, Conway, JM, Taylor, PR, Moe, PW, Judd, J. Validation and comparison of eight physical activity questionnaires. Epidemiology 1990; 1: 6571.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
46Manson, JE, Rimm, EB, Stampfer, MJ et al. Physical activity and incidence of non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus in women. Lancet 1991; 338: 774–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
47Cole, TJ. Sampling, study size, and power. In: Margetts, BM, Nelson, M, eds. Design Concepts in Nutritional Epidemiology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991: 5378.Google Scholar
48Margetts, BM, Nelson, M. Design Concepts in Nutritional Epidemiology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991.Google Scholar
You have Access
71
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

The validation of physical activity instruments for measuring energy expenditure: problems and pitfalls
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

The validation of physical activity instruments for measuring energy expenditure: problems and pitfalls
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

The validation of physical activity instruments for measuring energy expenditure: problems and pitfalls
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *