Reliability and validity of the Activity Questionnaire for Adults and Adolescents (AQuAA)
Reliability and validity of the Activity Questionnaire for Adults and Adolescents (AQuAA)
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/1471-2288-9-58
复制
发表时间：
2009-08-10
影响因子：
4
通讯作者：
van Mechelen, Willem
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Chinapaw, Mai J. M.;Slootmaker, Sander M.;van Mechelen, Willem
背景：非常需要对身体活动进行准确的测量。本研究采用自编成人和青少年活动问卷（AQuAA），对自编问卷的重测信度和结构效度进行了评价。AQuAA是荷兰青少年常用的问卷。方法：在重测信度研究中，53名青少年和58名成年人完成了两次AQuAA，间隔两周。在有效性研究中，33名青少年和47名成年人穿着加速度计（Actigraph）在两周内，随后完成了AQuAA.Results：在青少年的重测信度是公平的中度（组内相关系数（ICC）范围从0.30到0.59）。在成年人中，重测信度是公平到中等的时间花费在久坐不动，轻，中等强度的活动（ICC范围从0.49到0.60），但穷人的时间花费在剧烈活动（ICC = -0.005）。AQuAA和Actigraph之间的相关性较低且不显著。与Actigraph相比，所有的体力活动所花费的时间显着较高，根据问卷调查（除了轻强度的活动在青少年），而久坐不动的行为所花费的时间显着lower.Conclusion：AQuAA的可靠性是公平的中度。与加速度计相比，AQuAA的有效性较差。青少年和成年人都低估了久坐不动的时间，高估了体力活动的时间。
Background: Accurate measures of physical activity are highly needed. We evaluated the test-retest reliability and construct validity of the self-report Activity Questionnaire for Adults and Adolescents (AQuAA). The AQuAA is a commonly used questionnaire in Dutch youth.Methods: In the test-retest reliability study, 53 adolescents and 58 adults completed the AQuAA twice, with an interval of two weeks. In the validity study, 33 adolescents and 47 adults wore an accelerometer (Actigraph) during two weeks, and subsequently completed the AQuAA.Results: In adolescents the test-retest reliability was fair to moderate (intraclass correlations (ICCs) ranging from 0.30 to 0.59). In adults the test-retest reliability was fair to moderate for the time spent on sedentary, light and moderate intensity activities (ICCs ranging from 0.49 to 0.60), but poor for time spent on vigorous activities (ICC = -0.005). The correlations between the AQuAA and Actigraph were low and nonsignificant. Compared with the Actigraph, time spent on all physical activities was significantly higher according to the questionnaire (except for light intensity activities in adolescents), while time spent on sedentary behaviours was significantly lower.Conclusion: Reliability of the AQuAA is fair to moderate. The validity of the AQuAA compared to an accelerometer is poor. Both adolescents and adults underestimate the time spent on sedentary behaviours and overestimate the time spent on physical activities.