Title |
Validity of a multi-context sitting questionnaire across demographically diverse population groups: AusDiab3
|
---|---|
Published in |
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, December 2015
|
DOI | 10.1186/s12966-015-0309-y |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Bronwyn K Clark, Brigid M Lynch, Elisabeth AH Winkler, Paul A Gardiner, Genevieve N Healy, David W Dunstan, Neville Owen |
Abstract |
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. 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. 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). 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. |
Twitter Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 7 | 47% |
Australia | 2 | 13% |
Saint Lucia | 1 | 7% |
United States | 1 | 7% |
Unknown | 4 | 27% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Scientists | 9 | 60% |
Members of the public | 3 | 20% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 90 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 18% |
Student > Master | 14 | 16% |
Student > Bachelor | 8 | 9% |
Researcher | 6 | 7% |
Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 6% |
Other | 21 | 23% |
Unknown | 20 | 22% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Sports and Recreations | 15 | 17% |
Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 14% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 10% |
Psychology | 6 | 7% |
Social Sciences | 5 | 6% |
Other | 11 | 12% |
Unknown | 31 | 34% |