ArticleJournal of physical activity & health2015
"How Hard Could it Be?" A Descriptive Analysis of Errors Made on a Validated Lifetime Physical Activity Questionnaire.
Article in Journal of physical activity & health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physical Activity and Exercise Participation among Malaysian Children (Able-Bodied vs. Physical Disability): A Cross-Sectional Study.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Validation of the Lifetime Total Physical Activity Questionnaire (LTPAQ) in midlife and older adults with a history of late-onset depression.Archives of psychiatric nursing · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMeasuring historical physical activity in epidemiologic research depends on self-report. We aimed to describe data reporting errors women made in completing 2 validated questionnaires: Lifetime Physical Activity Questionnaire (LPAQ) and Occupational Questionnaire (OQ).
methodsParticipants--229 women aged 38 to 65 years--completed questionnaires on paper (n = 160) or by web interface (n = 69). One research assistant collected questionnaire data, identified potential errors and contacted participants to trouble-shoot errors.
resultsWomen made mean 9.7 (SD 11.2) errors on paper and 7.1 (SD 6.2) errors on electronic versions of the LPAQ and 2.6 (SD 3.8) and 1.1 (SD 1.4) errors on paper and electronic versions of the OQ, respectively. Fewer mistakes were made on electronic versions of both questionnaires combined (8.5 ± 6.1) when compared with the paper versions (12.7 ± 13.1). Only ~2% of the sample completed all questionnaires without detectable errors. The most common errors were reporting activities or frequencies inconsistently between past year survey and the current age epoch, reporting more years than allowed by age epoch and missing information.
conclusionsDespite the implications of "self-report" questionnaires, we recommend researchers provide participants with additional instructions, either verbally or as written tip sheet or both, and follow-up after questionnaire completion to correct mistakes as needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.