Validity of a multi-context sitting questionnaire across demographically diverse population groups: AusDiab3. Issue 1 (December 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Clark, Bronwyn; Lynch, Brigid; Winkler, Elisabeth; Gardiner, Paul; Healy, Genevieve; Dunstan, David; Owen, Neville
• Is Part Of: International journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity. Volume 12:Issue 1(2015)
• Page Start: 1
• Page End: 9
• Publication Date: 2015-12
• Subjects: activPAL -- Demographics -- Sedentary -- Epidemiology -- Measurement; Diet -- Periodicals; Physical fitness -- Periodicals; 613.2
• DOI: 10.1186/s12966-015-0309-y
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1479-5868

Abstract

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.