ArticleBMJ open2026
Criterion validity of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire Short Form against activPAL in overweight and obese adults: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the criterion validity and test-retest reliability of the Chinese version International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Short Form (cIPAQ-SF) for assessing sedentary behaviour and physical activity (PA) in overweight and obese Chinese adults, using activPAL as the reference.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted at a Clinical Nutrition Clinic in China. Participants completed the cIPAQ-SF before and after wearing an activPAL for 7 consecutive days. Criterion validity was assessed using Pearson's/Spearman's correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman plots for sitting time (hours/day), moderate, vigorous and moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) (min/week). Sensitivity and specificity evaluated the IPAQ-SF's accuracy in identifying those not engaging in any PA and those not meeting the PA recommendation (MVPA ≥150 min/week). Test-retest reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation (ICC).
resultsAmong 80 participants (age 33.9±7.3 years; body mass index 29.1±4.5 kg/m²), the IPAQ-SF demonstrated moderate criterion validity for sitting time (r=0.577 on weekdays, r=0.444 on weekends) and MVPA (ρ=0.451) compared with activPAL. It underestimated sitting time by 3.5 hours/day on weekdays and 2.9 hours/day on weekends. The cIPAQ-SF showed moderate-to-high sensitivity for correctly identifying individuals who were not engaging in any PA (53.6%-85.7%) or not meeting PA recommendations (93.8%), but its specificity was low to moderate (47.8%-73.7%) for PA engagement and meeting guidelines (55.2%). Test-retest reliability was moderate for sitting time (ICC=0.549-0.614) and poor to moderate for PA levels (ICC=0.453-0.592).
conclusionThe IPAQ-SF demonstrates moderate validity and reliability in assessing sedentary behaviour and insufficient PA among overweight and obese Chinese adults. It can be used to identify physically inactive individuals for targeted interventions and monitor changes in sedentary behaviour.
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.