Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
J Phys Act Health. 2012 Jan;9 Suppl 1:S29-36.

A checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of validation studies on self-report instruments for physical activity and sedentary behavior.

Author information

  • 1Dept of Neurobiology, Care Sciences, and Society, Karolinska Institute, Huddinge, Sweden.

Abstract

CONTEXT:

The quality of methodological papers assessing physical activity instruments depends upon the rigor of a study's design.

OBJECTIVES:

We present a checklist to assess key criteria for instrument validation studies.

PROCESS:

A Medline/PubMed search was performed to identify guidelines for evaluating the methodological quality of instrument validation studies. Based upon the literature, a pilot version of a checklist was developed consisting of 21 items with 3 subscales: 1) quality of the reported data (9 items: assess whether the reported information is sufficient to make an unbiased assessment of the findings); 2) external validity of the results (3 items: assess the extent to which the findings are generalizable); 3) internal validity of the study (9 items: assess the rigor of the study design). The checklist was tested for interrater reliability and feasibility with 6 raters.

FINDINGS:

Raters viewed the checklist as helpful for reviewing studies. They suggested minor wording changes for 8 items to clarify intent. One item was divided into 2 items for a total of 22 items.

DISCUSSION:

Checklists may be useful to assess the quality of studies designed to validate physical activity instruments. Future research should test checklist internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and criterion validity.

PMID:
22287445
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk