BACKGROUND: The EPIC core questionnaire on lifestyle contains a number of questions on physical activity designed to rank subjects according to level of physical activity (short PA questionnaire). These questions are based on a more extensive questionnaire designed to measure absolute total energy expenditure (extensive PA questionnaire), that was validated in a pilot study preceding EPIC. Reproducibility and relative validity of the short PA questionnaire were estimated by selecting, from the pilot study data, the answers to a number of questions from the extensive questionnaire that resembled those actually included in the short version. METHODS: The population of the pilot study consisted of 126 men and women aged between 20 and 70 years. Reproducibility was estimated by administering the extensive questionnaire three times: at baseline, and after 5 and 11 months. In order to determine the relative validity of the extensive questionnaire, a 3-day activity diary, repeated four times, was used as the reference method. RESULTS: Over the study period (13 months), mean absolute energy expenditure, estimated from the questions included in the short questionnaire, was fairly constant in men but not in women. REPRODUCIBILITY: Spearman correlation coefficients ranged from 0.47 to 0.89 in men, and from 0.49 to 0.81 in women. RELATIVE VALIDITY: Spearman correlation coefficients between the short questionnaire and the diary were between 0.32 and 0.81 for men, and between 0.28 and 0.72 for women. CONCLUSIONS: The questions selected for the short questionnaire are not suitable for estimating energy expenditure at an absolute level. Reproducibility and relative validity of the ranking of subjects seemed satisfactory and comparable to the extensive questionnaire. The results imply that the short questionnaire is suitable for ranking subjects in the EPIC study.
BACKGROUND: The EPIC core questionnaire on lifestyle contains a number of questions on physical activity designed to rank subjects according to level of physical activity (short PA questionnaire). These questions are based on a more extensive questionnaire designed to measure absolute total energy expenditure (extensive PA questionnaire), that was validated in a pilot study preceding EPIC. Reproducibility and relative validity of the short PA questionnaire were estimated by selecting, from the pilot study data, the answers to a number of questions from the extensive questionnaire that resembled those actually included in the short version. METHODS: The population of the pilot study consisted of 126 men and women aged between 20 and 70 years. Reproducibility was estimated by administering the extensive questionnaire three times: at baseline, and after 5 and 11 months. In order to determine the relative validity of the extensive questionnaire, a 3-day activity diary, repeated four times, was used as the reference method. RESULTS: Over the study period (13 months), mean absolute energy expenditure, estimated from the questions included in the short questionnaire, was fairly constant in men but not in women. REPRODUCIBILITY: Spearman correlation coefficients ranged from 0.47 to 0.89 in men, and from 0.49 to 0.81 in women. RELATIVE VALIDITY: Spearman correlation coefficients between the short questionnaire and the diary were between 0.32 and 0.81 for men, and between 0.28 and 0.72 for women. CONCLUSIONS: The questions selected for the short questionnaire are not suitable for estimating energy expenditure at an absolute level. Reproducibility and relative validity of the ranking of subjects seemed satisfactory and comparable to the extensive questionnaire. The results imply that the short questionnaire is suitable for ranking subjects in the EPIC study.
Authors: Olga Husson; Floortje Mols; Nicole P M Ezendam; Goof Schep; Lonneke V van de Poll-Franse Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2015-01-09 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Tijmen Koëter; Cynthia S Bonhof; Dounya Schoormans; Ingrid S Martijnse; Barbara S Langenhoff; David D E Zimmerman; Floortje Mols; Daria K Wasowicz Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2018-10-29 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Sarah Kozey Keadle; Eric J Shiroma; Masamitsu Kamada; Charles E Matthews; Tamara B Harris; I-Min Lee Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2017-01-03 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Andrew Rundle; John Richie; Karen Steindorf; Marco Peluso; Kim Overvad; Ole Raaschou-Nielsen; Francoise Clavel-Chapelon; Jacob P Linseisen; Heiner Boeing; Antonia Trichopoulou; Domenico Palli; Vittorio Krogh; Rosario Tumino; Salvatore Panico; Hendrik B Bueno-De-Mesquita; Petra H Peeters; Eiliv Lund; Carlos A Gonzalez; Carmen Martinez; Miren Dorronsoro; Aurelio Barricarte; M Jose Tormo; Josèr Quiros; Antonio Agudo; Goran Berglund; Bengt Jarvholm; Sheila Bingham; Timothy J Key; Emmanuelle Gormally; Rodolfo Saracci; Rudolf Kaaks; Elio Riboli; Paolo Vineis Journal: Biomarkers Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 2.658
Authors: Linda M Oude Griep; Johanna M Geleijnse; Daan Kromhout; Marga C Ocké; W M Monique Verschuren Journal: PLoS One Date: 2010-10-25 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Isabel Fortier; Paul R Burton; Paula J Robson; Vincent Ferretti; Julian Little; Francois L'Heureux; Mylène Deschênes; Bartha M Knoppers; Dany Doiron; Joost C Keers; Pamela Linksted; Jennifer R Harris; Geneviève Lachance; Catherine Boileau; Nancy L Pedersen; Carol M Hamilton; Kristian Hveem; Marilyn J Borugian; Richard P Gallagher; John McLaughlin; Louise Parker; John D Potter; John Gallacher; Rudolf Kaaks; Bette Liu; Tim Sprosen; Anne Vilain; Susan A Atkinson; Andrea Rengifo; Robin Morton; Andres Metspalu; H Erich Wichmann; Mark Tremblay; Rex L Chisholm; Andrés Garcia-Montero; Hans Hillege; Jan-Eric Litton; Lyle J Palmer; Markus Perola; Bruce H R Wolffenbuttel; Leena Peltonen; Thomas J Hudson Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2010-09-02 Impact factor: 7.196