Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2015 Dec 4;12:148. doi: 10.1186/s12966-015-0309-y.

Validity of a multi-context sitting questionnaire across demographically diverse population groups: AusDiab3.

Clark BK1, Lynch BM2,3,4, Winkler EA5, Gardiner PA5,6, Healy GN5,4,7, Dunstan DW5,4,7,8,9,10,11,12, Owen N5,3,4,11.

Author information

1
The University of Queensland, School of Public Health, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. b.clark3@uq.edu.au.
2
Cancer Epidemiology Centre, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Australia.
3
Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
4
Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
5
The University of Queensland, School of Public Health, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
6
Mater Research Institute - The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
7
Curtin University, School of Physiotherapy, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
8
School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, Australia.
9
Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
10
School of Sport Science, Exercise and Health, The University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia.
11
Central Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
12
Mary MacKillop Institute for Health Research, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Sitting time questionnaires have largely been validated in small convenience samples. The validity of this multi-context sitting questionnaire against an accurate measure of sitting time is reported in a large demographically diverse sample allowing assessment of validity in varied demographic subgroups.

METHODS:

A subgroup of participants of the third wave of the Australian Diabetes, Obesity, and Lifestyle (AusDiab3) study wore activPAL3™ monitors (7 days, 24 hours/day protocol) and reported their sitting time for work, travel, television viewing, leisure computer use and "other" purposes, on weekdays and weekend days (n = 700, age 36-89 years, 45% men). Correlations (Pearson's r; Spearman's ρ) of the self-report measures (the composite total, contextual measures and items) with monitor-assessed sitting time were assessed in the whole sample and separately in socio-demographic subgroups. Agreement was assessed using Bland-Altman plots.

RESULTS:

The composite total had a correlation with monitor-assessed sitting time of r = 0.46 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.40, 0.52); this correlation did not vary significantly between demographic subgroups (all >0.4). The contextual measure most strongly correlated with monitor-assessed sitting time was work (ρ = 0.25, 95 % CI: 0.17, 0.31), followed by television viewing (ρ = 0.16, 95 % CI: 0.09, 0.24). Agreement of the composite total with monitored sitting time was poor, with a positive bias (B = 0.53, SE 0.04, p < 0.001) and wide limits of agreement (±4.32 h).

CONCLUSIONS:

This multi-context questionnaire provides a total sitting time measure that ranks participants well for the purposes of assessing health associations but has limited accuracy relative to activPAL-assessed sitting time. Findings did not differ in demographic subgroups.

PMID:
26637392
PMCID:
PMC4670496
DOI:
10.1186/s12966-015-0309-y
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for BioMed Central Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center