Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0136944
DC FieldValue
dc.titleReliability and validity of the self- and interviewer-administered versions of the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ)
dc.contributor.authorChu A.H.Y.
dc.contributor.authorNg S.H.X.
dc.contributor.authorKoh D.
dc.contributor.authorMüller-Riemenschneider F.
dc.contributor.authorBrucki S.
dc.date.accessioned2020-03-19T02:59:37Z
dc.date.available2020-03-19T02:59:37Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.identifier.citationChu A.H.Y., Ng S.H.X., Koh D., Müller-Riemenschneider F., Brucki S. (2015). Reliability and validity of the self- and interviewer-administered versions of the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ). PLoS ONE 10 (9) : e0136944. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0136944
dc.identifier.issn19326203
dc.identifier.urihttps://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/165685
dc.description.abstractObjective: The Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ) was originally designed to be interviewer-administered by the World Health Organization in assessing physical activity. The main aim of this study was to compare the psychometric properties of a self-administered GPAQ with the original interviewer-administered approach. Additionally, this study explored whether using different accelerometry-based physical activity bout definitions might affect the questionnaire's validity. Methods: A total of 110 participants were recruited and randomly allocated to an interviewer- (n = 56) or a self-administered (n = 54) group for test-retest reliability, of which 108 participants who met the wear time criteria were included in the validity study. Reliability was assessed by administration of questionnaires twice with a one-week interval. Criterion validity was assessed by comparing against seven-day accelerometer measures. Two definitions for accelerometry-data scoring were employed: (1) total-min of activity, and (2) 10-min bout. Results: Participants had similar baseline characteristics in both administration groups and no significant difference was found between the two formats in terms of validity (correlations between the GPAQ and accelerometer). For validity, the GPAQ demonstrated fair-to-moderate correlations for moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) for self-administration (rs = 0.30) and interviewer-administration (rs = 0.46). Findings were similar when considering 10-min activity bouts in the accelerometer analysis for MVPA (rs = 0.29 vs. 0.42 for self vs. interviewer). Within each mode of administration, the strongest correlations were observed for vigorous-intensity activity. However, Bland-Altman plots illustrated bias toward overestimation for higher levels of MVPA, vigorous- and moderate-intensity activities, and underestimation for lower levels of these measures. Reliability for MVPA revealed moderate correlations (rs = 0.61 vs. 0.63 for self vs. interviewer). Conclusions: Our findings showed comparability between both self- and interviewer-administration modes of the GPAQ. The GPAQ in general but especially the self-administered version may offer a relatively inexpensive method for measuring physical activity of various types and at different domains. However, there may be bias in the GPAQ measurements depending on the overall physical activity. It is advisable to incorporate accelerometers in future studies, particularly when measuring different intensities of physical activity. © 2015 Chu et al.This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
dc.publisherPublic Library of Science
dc.sourceUnpaywall 20200320
dc.subjectaccelerometry
dc.subjectadult
dc.subjectage distribution
dc.subjectaged
dc.subjectArticle
dc.subjectChinese
dc.subjectcomparative study
dc.subjectcontrolled study
dc.subjectcriterion related validity
dc.subjectcross-sectional study
dc.subjecteducational status
dc.subjectfemale
dc.subjectGlobal Physical Activity Questionnaire interviewer administered version
dc.subjectGlobal Physical Activity Questionnaire self administered version
dc.subjecthuman
dc.subjectmale
dc.subjectmoderate to vigorous physical activity
dc.subjectphysical activity
dc.subjectpsychometry
dc.subjectquestionnaire
dc.subjectreliability
dc.subjectSingapore
dc.subjecttest retest reliability
dc.subjectvalidity
dc.subjectvigorous intensity activity
dc.subjectexercise
dc.subjectmiddle aged
dc.subjectmotor activity
dc.subjectphysiology
dc.subjectprocedures
dc.subjectquestionnaire
dc.subjectreproducibility
dc.subjectself report
dc.subjectstandards
dc.subjecttime
dc.subjectvalidation study
dc.subjectworld health organization
dc.subjectyoung adult
dc.subjectAccelerometry
dc.subjectAdult
dc.subjectAged
dc.subjectCross-Sectional Studies
dc.subjectExercise
dc.subjectFemale
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectMale
dc.subjectMiddle Aged
dc.subjectMotor Activity
dc.subjectPsychometrics
dc.subjectReproducibility of Results
dc.subjectSelf Report
dc.subjectSurveys and Questionnaires
dc.subjectTime
dc.subjectWorld Health Organization
dc.subjectYoung Adult
dc.typeArticle
dc.contributor.departmentSAW SWEE HOCK SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH
dc.description.doi10.1371/journal.pone.0136944
dc.description.sourcetitlePLoS ONE
dc.description.volume10
dc.description.issue9
dc.description.pagee0136944
dc.published.statePublished
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications
Elements

Show simple item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
10_1371_journal_pone_0136944.pdf455.2 kBAdobe PDF

OPEN

PublishedView/Download

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.