ArticlePloS one2025
The measurement reliability and equivalence of print versus online versions of the Youth Activity Profile.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe Youth Activity Profile (YAP) is a 7-day self-report designed to quantify physical activity and sedentary behaviors among youth. This study evaluated the reliability of the online version of the YAP and equivalence with the paper-based version.
methodA total of 2,490 participants from 17 schools in Iowa and Texas completed the YAP. Each classroom was randomly assigned to complete either the print or online version twice. A variance components model was used to assess the test-retest reliability and equivalence testing was also applied.
resultsBoth paper and online versions had similar reliability for the PA estimates in school (ICCprint = 0.69-0.91; ICConline = 0.54-0.84), at home (ICCprint = 0.72-0.83; ICConline = 0.64-0.94), PA at weekend (ICCprint = 0.33-0.72; ICConline = 0.39-0.70), and SB (ICCprint = 0.69-0.90; ICConline = 0.66-0.80). The two versions were statistically equivalent for most YAP items except for recess.
conclusionThe online YAP appears to be a reliable assessment of physical activity and sedentary behavior in youth populations.
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.