...
首页> 外文期刊>Medicine and science in sports and exercise >Adults' Past-Day Recall of Sedentary Time: Reliability, Validity, and Responsiveness.
【24h】

Adults' Past-Day Recall of Sedentary Time: Reliability, Validity, and Responsiveness.

机译:成人过去一天的久坐时间回忆:可靠性,有效性和响应性。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

PURPOSE: Past-day recall rather than recall of past week or a usual/typical day may improve the validity of self-reported sedentary time measures. This study examined the test-retest reliability, criterion validity, and responsiveness of the seven-item questionnaire, Past-day Adults' Sedentary Time (PAST). METHODS: Participants (breast cancer survivors, n = 90, age = 33-75 yr, body mass index = 25-40 kg·m) in a 6-month randomized controlled trial of a lifestyle-based weight loss intervention completed the interviewer-administered PAST questionnaire about time spent sitting/lying on the previous day for work, transport, television viewing, nonwork computer use, reading, hobbies, and other purposes (summed for total sedentary time). The instrument was administered at baseline, 7 d later for test-retest reliability (n = 86), and at follow-up. ActivPAL3-assessed sit/lie time in bouts of ≥5 min during waking hours on the recall day was used as the validity criterion measure at both baseline (n = 72) and follow-up (n = 68). Analyses included intraclass correlation coefficients, Pearson's correlations (r), and Bland-Altman plots and responsiveness index. RESULTS: The PAST had fair to good test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.32-0.64). At baseline, the correlation between PAST and activPAL sit/lie time was r = 0.57 (95% CI = 0.39-0.71). The mean difference between PAST at baseline and retest was -25 min (5.2%), 95% limits of agreement = -5.9 to 5.0 h, and the activPAL sit/lie time was -9 min (1.8%), 95% limits of agreement = -4.9 to 4.6 h. The PAST showed small but significant responsiveness (-0.44, 95% CI = -0.92 to -0.04); responsiveness of activPAL sit/lie time was not significant. CONCLUSION: The PAST questionnaire provided an easy-to-administer measure of sedentary time in this sample. Validity and reliability findings compare favorably with other sedentary time questionnaires. Past-day recall of sedentary time shows promise for use in future health behavior, epidemiological, and population surveillance studies.
机译:目的:回顾过去的一天而不是回顾过去一周或通常/典型的一天可能会提高自我报告的久坐时间量度的有效性。这项研究检查了七项问卷“过去一天的成年人久坐时间”(PAST)的重测信度,标准效度和响应度。方法:在一项基于生活方式的减肥干预的为期6个月的随机对照试验中,参与者(乳腺癌幸存者,n = 90,年龄= 33-75岁,体重指数= 25-40 kg·m)完成了访调员,通过PAST问卷调查了前一天在工作,交通,看电视,使用非工作计算机,阅读,爱好和其他目的上花费的时间(总计久坐时间)。在基线,7 d后进行测试以确保重测信度(n = 86)和随访。在基线(n = 72)和随访(n = 68)时,将ActivPAL3评估的坐/躺时间(在召回日的醒来时间≥5分钟)用作有效性标准量度。分析包括类内相关系数,Pearson相关性(r),Bland-Altman图和响应指数。结果:PAST具有相当或良好的重测信度(组内相关系数= 0.50,95%置信区间[CI] = 0.32-0.64)。在基线时,PAST和activPAL坐/躺时间之间的相关性为r = 0.57(95%CI = 0.39-0.71)。基线和复测时PAST的平均差为-25分钟(5.2%),一致性的95%限制= -5.9至5.0小时,而activPAL坐/躺时间为-9分钟(1.8%),95%的限制一致= -4.9至4.6小时。 PAST表现出较小但明显的反应性(-0.44,95%CI = -0.92至-0.04); activPAL坐/躺时间的反应性不显着。结论:PAST问卷提供了一种易于管理的久坐时间量度。有效性和可靠性调查结果与其他久坐时间问卷相比具有优势。久坐时间的过去回忆表明,有望在未来的健康行为,流行病学和人口监测研究中使用。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号