IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0195712.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reliability and validity of the international physical activity questionnaire compared to calibrated accelerometer cut-off points in the quantification of sedentary behaviour and physical activity in older adults

Author

Listed:
  • Declan J Ryan
  • Jorgen A Wullems
  • Georgina K Stebbings
  • Christopher I Morse
  • Claire E Stewart
  • Gladys L Onambele-Pearson

Abstract

Background: The aim was to determine the reliability and validity of IPAQ measured sedentary behaviour (SB) and moderate–vigorous physical activity (MVPA) in older persons whilst examining any sex differences in reliability and validity results. Method: 89 participants (73.7 ± 6.3 years, 54% female) completed the IPAQ. Participants were fitted with a thigh mounted triaxial accelerometer (GeneActiv Original) for seven consecutive days and subsequently completed a second IPAQ. Results: IPAQ showed weak reliability qualities for Total SB (h·week-1) and 10 minute MVPA (accumulated in bouts ≥ 10 continuous minutes, h·week-1). IPAQ had poor concurrent validity qualities for Total SB, 10 minute MVPA, but not Sporadic MVPA (accumulated in bouts

Suggested Citation

  • Declan J Ryan & Jorgen A Wullems & Georgina K Stebbings & Christopher I Morse & Claire E Stewart & Gladys L Onambele-Pearson, 2018. "Reliability and validity of the international physical activity questionnaire compared to calibrated accelerometer cut-off points in the quantification of sedentary behaviour and physical activity in ," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0195712
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0195712
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0195712
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0195712&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0195712?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0195712. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.