IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i9p4602-d543944.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validity and Reliability of IPAQ-SF and GPAQ for Assessing Sedentary Behaviour in Adults in the European Union: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Kaja Meh

    (Faculty of Sport, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia)

  • Gregor Jurak

    (Faculty of Sport, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia)

  • Maroje Sorić

    (Faculty of Sport, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
    Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Zagreb, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia)

  • Paulo Rocha

    (Portuguese Institute of Sport and Youth, 1990-100 Lisbon, Portugal)

  • Vedrana Sember

    (Faculty of Sport, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia)

Abstract

Current lifestyles are marked by sedentary behaviour; thus, it is of great importance for policymaking to have valid and reliable tools to measure sedentary behaviour in order to combat it. Therefore, the aim of this review and meta-analysis is to critically review, assess, and compile the reliability, criterion validity, and construct validity of the single-item sedentary behaviour questions within national language versions of most commonly used international physical activity questionnaires for adults in the European Union: The International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Short Form and the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire. A total of 1749 records were screened, 287 full-text papers were read, and 14 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The results and quality of studies were evaluated by the Quality Assessment of Physical Activity Questionnaires checklist. Meta-analysis indicated moderate to high reliability (r w = 0.59) and concurrent validity (r w = 0.55) of national language versions of single-item sedentary behaviour questions. Criterion validity was rather low (r w = 0.23) but in concordance with previous studies. The risk of bias analysis highlighted the poor reporting of methods and results, with a total bias score of 0.42. Thus, we recommend using multi-item SB questionnaires and smart trackers for providing information on SB rather than single-item sedentary behaviour questions in physical activity questionnaires.

Suggested Citation

  • Kaja Meh & Gregor Jurak & Maroje Sorić & Paulo Rocha & Vedrana Sember, 2021. "Validity and Reliability of IPAQ-SF and GPAQ for Assessing Sedentary Behaviour in Adults in the European Union: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-17, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:9:p:4602-:d:543944
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/9/4602/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/9/4602/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vedrana Sember & Kaja Meh & Maroje Sorić & Gregor Starc & Paulo Rocha & Gregor Jurak, 2020. "Validity and Reliability of International Physical Activity Questionnaires for Adults across EU Countries: Systematic Review and Meta Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-23, September.
    2. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    3. Riley, L. & Guthold, R. & Cowan, M. & Savin, S. & Bhatti, L. & Armstrong, T. & Bonita, R., 2016. "The world health organization STEPwise approach to noncommunicable disease risk-factor surveillance: Methods, challenges, and opportunities," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 106(1), pages 74-78.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pauliina Husu & Henri Vähä-Ypyä & Kari Tokola & Harri Sievänen & Paulo Rocha & Tommi Vasankari, 2024. "Reliability and Validity of Self-Reported Questionnaires Assessing Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior in Finland," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(6), pages 1-13, May.
    2. Ewelina Czenczek-Lewandowska & Justyna Leszczak & Justyna Wyszyńska & Joanna Baran & Aneta Weres & Bogumił Lewandowski, 2022. "The Role of Physical Activity in the Reduction of Generalised Anxiety Disorder in Young Adults in the Context of COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-12, September.
    3. Roger Montenegro Mendoza & Reina Roa & Flavia Fontes & Ilais Moreno Velásquez & Hedley Quintana, 2023. "Physical Inactivity and Sedentary Behaviour among Panamanian Adults: Results from the National Health Survey of Panama (ENSPA) 2019," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(8), pages 1-15, April.
    4. Kaja Meh & Vedrana Sember & Saša Đurić & Henri Vähä-Ypyä & Paulo Rocha & Gregor Jurak, 2021. "Reliability and Validity of Slovenian Versions of IPAQ-SF, GPAQ, and EHIS-PAQ for Assessing Physical Activity and Sedentarism of Adults," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-15, December.

    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. Vedrana Sember & Kaja Meh & Maroje Sorić & Gregor Starc & Paulo Rocha & Gregor Jurak, 2020. "Validity and Reliability of International Physical Activity Questionnaires for Adults across EU Countries: Systematic Review and Meta Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-23, September.
    2. Fisaha Haile Tesfay & Kathryn Backholer & Christina Zorbas & Steven J. Bowe & Laura Alston & Catherine M. Bennett, 2022. "The Magnitude of NCD Risk Factors in Ethiopia: Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of Evidence," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-19, April.
    3. Kaja Meh & Vedrana Sember & Saša Đurić & Henri Vähä-Ypyä & Paulo Rocha & Gregor Jurak, 2021. "Reliability and Validity of Slovenian Versions of IPAQ-SF, GPAQ, and EHIS-PAQ for Assessing Physical Activity and Sedentarism of Adults," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-15, December.
    4. İlkay Unay-Gailhard & Mark A. Brennen, 2022. "How digital communications contribute to shaping the career paths of youth: a review study focused on farming as a career option," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(4), pages 1491-1508, December.
    5. Mahin Ghafari & Vali Baigi & Zahra Cheraghi & Amin Doosti-Irani, 2016. "The Prevalence of Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Iranian Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-10, June.
    6. Elizabeth T Cafiero-Fonseca & Andrew Stawasz & Sydney T Johnson & Reiko Sato & David E Bloom, 2017. "The full benefits of adult pneumococcal vaccination: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.
    7. Santos Urbina & Sofía Villatoro & Jesús Salinas, 2021. "Self-Regulated Learning and Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments in Higher Education: A Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-12, June.
    8. Oded Berger-Tal & Alison L Greggor & Biljana Macura & Carrie Ann Adams & Arden Blumenthal & Amos Bouskila & Ulrika Candolin & Carolina Doran & Esteban Fernández-Juricic & Kiyoko M Gotanda & Catherine , 2019. "Systematic reviews and maps as tools for applying behavioral ecology to management and policy," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 30(1), pages 1-8.
    9. Nadine Desrochers & Adèle Paul‐Hus & Jen Pecoskie, 2017. "Five decades of gratitude: A meta‐synthesis of acknowledgments research," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(12), pages 2821-2833, December.
    10. Maryono, Maryono & Killoes, Aditya Marendra & Adhikari, Rajendra & Abdul Aziz, Ammar, 2024. "Agriculture development through multi-stakeholder partnerships in developing countries: A systematic literature review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    11. Alene Sze Jing Yong & Yi Heng Lim & Mark Wing Loong Cheong & Ednin Hamzah & Siew Li Teoh, 2022. "Willingness-to-pay for cancer treatment and outcome: a systematic review," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(6), pages 1037-1057, August.
    12. Xue-Ying Xu & Hong Kong & Rui-Xiang Song & Yu-Han Zhai & Xiao-Fei Wu & Wen-Si Ai & Hong-Bo Liu, 2014. "The Effectiveness of Noninvasive Biomarkers to Predict Hepatitis B-Related Significant Fibrosis and Cirrhosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-16, June.
    13. Vicente Miñana-Signes & Manuel Monfort-Pañego & Javier Valiente, 2021. "Teaching Back Health in the School Setting: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-18, January.
    14. Agnieszka A. Tubis & Katarzyna Grzybowska, 2022. "In Search of Industry 4.0 and Logistics 4.0 in Small-Medium Enterprises—A State of the Art Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-26, November.
    15. Obsa Urgessa Ayana & Jima Degaga, 2022. "Effects of rural electrification on household welfare: a meta-regression analysis," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 69(2), pages 209-261, June.
    16. Caloffi, Annalisa & Colovic, Ana & Rizzoli, Valentina & Rossi, Federica, 2023. "Innovation intermediaries' types and functions: A computational analysis of the literature," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    17. García-Poole, Chloe & Byrne, Sonia & Rodrigo, María José, 2019. "How do communities intervene with adolescents at psychosocial risk? A systematic review of positive development programs," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 194-209.
    18. Jie Zhao & Ji Chen & Damien Beillouin & Hans Lambers & Yadong Yang & Pete Smith & Zhaohai Zeng & Jørgen E. Olesen & Huadong Zang, 2022. "Global systematic review with meta-analysis reveals yield advantage of legume-based rotations and its drivers," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, December.
    19. Qing Ye & Bao-Xin Qian & Wei-Li Yin & Feng-Mei Wang & Tao Han, 2016. "Association between the HFE C282Y, H63D Polymorphisms and the Risks of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease, Liver Cirrhosis and Hepatocellular Carcinoma: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis o," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, September.
    20. Bishal Mohindru & David Turner & Tracey Sach & Diana Bilton & Siobhan Carr & Olga Archangelidi & Arjun Bhadhuri & Jennifer A. Whitty, 2020. "Health State Utility Data in Cystic Fibrosis: A Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 13-25, March.

    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:18:y:2021:i:9:p:4602-:d:543944. 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.