Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33926123›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Validity and Reliability of IPAQ-SF and GPAQ for Assessing Sedentary Behaviour in Adults in the European Union: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Kaja Meh, Gregor Jurak, Maroje Sorić, Paulo Rocha, Vedrana Sember

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 82 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
82citing papers in PubMed
8.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

82 citing papers in PubMed, 121 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

22 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Kaja MehFaculty of Sport, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID 0000-0002-2044-1255
Gregor JurakFaculty of Sport, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Maroje SorićFaculty of Sport, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID 0000-0001-6835-1438
Paulo RochaPortuguese Institute of Sport and Youth, 1990-100 Lisbon, Portugal.
Vedrana SemberFaculty of Sport, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.
University of Ljubljana · SI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Current lifestyles are marked by sedentary behaviour; thus, it is of great importance for policymaking to have valid and reliable tools to measure sedentary behaviour in order to combat it. Therefore, the aim of this review and meta-analysis is to critically review, assess, and compile the reliability, criterion validity, and construct validity of the single-item sedentary behaviour questions within national language versions of most commonly used international physical activity questionnaires for adults in the European Union: The International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Short Form and the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire. A total of 1749 records were screened, 287 full-text papers were read, and 14 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The results and quality of studies were evaluated by the Quality Assessment of Physical Activity Questionnaires checklist. Meta-analysis indicated moderate to high reliability (r

Indexed as

ExerciseSedentary BehaviorEuropean UnionReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnairesexercisehuman activitieslifestylephysical fitnesspublic health surveillanceself-reportsurveys and questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID33926123
PMCPMC8123682
OpenAlexW3157671826

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.