IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i7p4269-d786065.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validity of Three Survey Questions for Self-Assessed Sedentary Time

Author

Listed:
  • Viktoria Wahlström

    (Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umeå University, 901 87 Umeå, Sweden)

  • Mikael Nygren

    (Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umeå University, 901 87 Umeå, Sweden)

  • David Olsson

    (Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umeå University, 901 87 Umeå, Sweden)

  • Frida Bergman

    (Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umeå University, 901 87 Umeå, Sweden)

  • Charlotte Lewis

    (Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umeå University, 901 87 Umeå, Sweden)

Abstract

Time spent in sedentary behavior (SB) has increased during the last decades. Accurate assessments are of importance when studying health consequences of SB. This study aimed to assess concurrent validity between three different questions for self-reported sitting and thigh worn accelerometer data. In total, 86 participants wore the ActivPAL accelerometer during three separate weeks, assessing sitting time with different questions each week. The questions used were Katzmarzyk, GIH stationary single-item question (SED-GIH), and a modified version of the single-item from IPAQ short form. In total 64, 57, and 55 participants provided valid accelerometer and questionnaire data at each time-point, respectively, and were included for analysis. Spearman and Pearson correlation was used to assess the validity. The three questions, Katzmarzyk, SED-GIH, and a modified question from IPAQ all showed a weak non-significant correlation to ActivPAL with r-values of 0.26, 0.25, and 0.19 respectively. For Katzmarzyk and SED-GIH, 50% and 37% reported correctly, respectively. For the modified IPAQ, 53% over-reported and 47% under-reported their sitting time. In line with previous research, our study shows poor validity for self-reported sitting-time. For future research, the use of sensor-based data on SB are of high importance.

Suggested Citation

  • Viktoria Wahlström & Mikael Nygren & David Olsson & Frida Bergman & Charlotte Lewis, 2022. "Validity of Three Survey Questions for Self-Assessed Sedentary Time," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-9, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:7:p:4269-:d:786065
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/7/4269/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/7/4269/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lena V. Kallings & Sven J. G. Olsson & Örjan Ekblom & Elin Ekblom-Bak & Mats Börjesson, 2019. "The SED-GIH: A Single-Item Question for Assessment of Stationary Behavior—A Study of Concurrent and Convergent Validity," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-12, November.
    2. Maria Öhrn & Viktoria Wahlström & Mette S. Harder & Maria Nordin & Anita Pettersson-Strömbäck & Christina Bodin Danielsson & David Olsson & Martin Andersson & Lisbeth Slunga Järvholm, 2021. "Productivity, Satisfaction, Work Environment and Health after Relocation to an Activity-Based Flex Office—The Active Office Design Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(14), pages 1-16, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Katarzyna Kocur-Bera & Iwona Grzelka, 2022. "Impact of Modern Technologies on the Organization of the Cadastral Data Modernization Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-22, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:7:p:4269-:d:786065. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.