BACKGROUND: Self-reported confidence ratings have been used in other research disciplines as a tool to assess data quality, and may be useful in epidemiologic studies. METHODS: We examined whether self-reported confidence in recall of physical activity was a predictor of the validity and retest reliability of physical activity measures from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) past-year questionnaire and the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) last-7-day questionnaire.During 2005-2006 in Sydney, Australia, 97 men and 80 women completed both questionnaires at baseline and at 10 months and wore an accelerometer as an objective comparison measure for three 7-day periods during the same timeframe. Participants rated their confidence in recalling physical activity for each question using a 5-point scale and were dichotomized at the median confidence value. RESULTS: Participants in the high-confidence group had higher validity and repeatability coefficients than those in the low-confidence group for most comparisons. The differences were most apparent for validity of IPAQ moderate activity: Spearman correlation rho = 0.34 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.08 to 0.55) and 0.01 (-0.17 to 0.20) for high- and low-confidence groups, respectively; and repeatability of EPIC household activity: rho = 0.81 (0.72 to 0.87) and 0.63 (0.48 to 0.74), respectively, and IPAQ vigorous activity: rho = 0.58 (0.43 to 0.70) and 0.29 (0.07 to 0.49), respectively. Women were less likely than men to report high recall confidence of past-year activity (adjusted odds ratio = 0.38; 0.18 to 0.80). CONCLUSIONS: Confidence ratings could be useful as indicators of recall accuracy (ie, validity and repeatability) of physical activity measures, and possibly for detecting differential measurement error and identifying questionnaire items that require improvement.
BACKGROUND: Self-reported confidence ratings have been used in other research disciplines as a tool to assess data quality, and may be useful in epidemiologic studies. METHODS: We examined whether self-reported confidence in recall of physical activity was a predictor of the validity and retest reliability of physical activity measures from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) past-year questionnaire and the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) last-7-day questionnaire.During 2005-2006 in Sydney, Australia, 97 men and 80 women completed both questionnaires at baseline and at 10 months and wore an accelerometer as an objective comparison measure for three 7-day periods during the same timeframe. Participants rated their confidence in recalling physical activity for each question using a 5-point scale and were dichotomized at the median confidence value. RESULTS:Participants in the high-confidence group had higher validity and repeatability coefficients than those in the low-confidence group for most comparisons. The differences were most apparent for validity of IPAQ moderate activity: Spearman correlation rho = 0.34 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.08 to 0.55) and 0.01 (-0.17 to 0.20) for high- and low-confidence groups, respectively; and repeatability of EPIC household activity: rho = 0.81 (0.72 to 0.87) and 0.63 (0.48 to 0.74), respectively, and IPAQ vigorous activity: rho = 0.58 (0.43 to 0.70) and 0.29 (0.07 to 0.49), respectively. Women were less likely than men to report high recall confidence of past-year activity (adjusted odds ratio = 0.38; 0.18 to 0.80). CONCLUSIONS: Confidence ratings could be useful as indicators of recall accuracy (ie, validity and repeatability) of physical activity measures, and possibly for detecting differential measurement error and identifying questionnaire items that require improvement.
Authors: Barbara Sternfeld; Kelley Pettee Gabriel; Sheng-Fang Jiang; Kara M Whitaker; David R Jacobs; Charles P Quesenberry; Mercedes Carnethon; Stephen Sidney Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2019-12 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Stephanie Skender; Jennifer Ose; Jenny Chang-Claude; Michael Paskow; Boris Brühmann; Erin M Siegel; Karen Steindorf; Cornelia M Ulrich Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2016-06-16 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Bongkyoo Choi; Peter Schnall; Marnie Dobson; Leslie Israel; Paul Landsbergis; Pietro Galassetti; Andria Pontello; Stacey Kojaku; Dean Baker Journal: Saf Health Work Date: 2011-12-05
Authors: Cedric Busschaert; Ilse De Bourdeaudhuij; Veerle Van Holle; Sebastien F M Chastin; Greet Cardon; Katrien De Cocker Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2015-09-17 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Roosmarijn Verstraeten; Carl Lachat; Angélica Ochoa-Avilés; Maria Hagströmer; Lieven Huybregts; Susana Andrade; Silvana Donoso; John Van Camp; Lea Maes; Patrick Kolsteren Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2013-12-01 Impact factor: 3.295