Test-Retest Reliability and Walk Score® Neighbourhood Walkability Comparison of an Online Perceived Neighbourhood-Specific Adaptation of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ)
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study and Sample Design
2.2. Variables
2.2.1. Neighbourhood Adapted International Physical Activity Questionnaire (N-IPAQ)
2.2.2. Sociodemographic Characteristics
2.2.3. Neighbourhood Walkability
2.3. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Sample Characteristics
3.2. Self-Reported Participation in Perceived Neighbourhood-Specific Physical Activity
3.3. Self-Reported Days and Minutes of Perceived Neighbourhood-Specific Physical Activity
3.4. Relations between Perceived Neighbourhood-Specific Physical Activity and Neighbourhood Built Environment
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Saelens, B.E.; Handy, S.L. Built environment correlates of walking: A review. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 2008, 40, S550–S566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wendel-Vos, W.; Droomers, M.; Kremers, S.; Brug, J.; van Lenthe, F. Potential environmental determinants of physical activity in adults: A systematic review. Obes. Rev. 2007, 8, 425–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- McCormack, G.R.; Shiell, A. In search of causality: A systematic review of the relationship between the built environment and physical activity among adults. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2011, 8, 125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giles–Corti, B.; Timperio, A.; Cutt, H.; Pikora, T.J.; Bull, F.C.; Knuiman, M.; Bulsara, M.; Van Niel, K.; Shilton, T. Development of a reliable measure of walking within and outside the local neighborhood: Reside’s neighborhood physical activity questionnaire. Prev. Med. 2006, 42, 455–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Owen, N.; Cerin, E.; Leslie, E.; duToit, L.; Coffee, N.; Frank, L.D.; Bauman, A.E.; Hugo, G.; Saelens, B.E.; Sallis, J.F. Neighborhood walkability and the walking behavior of australian adults. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2007, 33, 387–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sundquist, K.; Eriksson, U.; Kawakami, N.; Skog, L.; Ohlsson, H.; Arvidsson, D. Neighborhood walkability, physical activity, and walking behavior: The swedish neighborhood and physical activity (snap) study. Soc. Sci. Med. 2011, 72, 1266–1273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cerin, E.; Barnett, A.; Sit, C.H.; Cheung, M.C.; Lee, L.C.; Ho, S.Y.; Chan, W.M. Measuring walking within and outside the neighborhood in chinese elders: Reliability and validity. BMC Public Health 2011, 11, 851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McCormack, G.R.; Shiell, A.; Doyle-Baker, P.K.; Friedenreich, C.; Sandalack, B.; Giles-Corti, B. Testing the reliability of neighborhood-specific measures of physical activity among canadian adults. J. Phys. Act. Health 2009, 6, 367–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Doma, K.; Speyer, R.; Leicht, A.S.; Cordier, R. Comparison of psychometric properties between usual-week and past-week self-reported physical activity questionnaires: A systematic review. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2017, 14, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anderson, D.; Seib, C.; Tjondronegoro, D.; Turner, J.; Monterosso, L.; McGuire, A.; Porter-Steele, J.; Song, W.; Yates, P.; King, N.; et al. The women’s wellness after cancer program: A multisite, single-blinded, randomised controlled trial protocol. BMC Cancer 2017, 17, 98. [Google Scholar]
- Hansen, A.W.; Dahl-Petersen, I.; Helge, J.W.; Brage, S.; Gronbaek, M.; Flensborg-Madsen, T. Validation of an internet-based long version of the international physical activity questionnaire in danish adults using combined accelerometry and heart rate monitoring. J. Phys. Act. Health 2014, 11, 654–664. [Google Scholar]
- Wong, F.Y. Influence of pokemon go on physical activity levels of university players: A cross-sectional study. Int. J. Health Geogr. 2017, 16, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taylor, N.J.; Crouter, S.E.; Lawton, R.J.; Conner, M.T.; Prestwich, A. Development and validation of the online self-reported walking and exercise questionnaire (osweq). J. Phys. Act. Health 2013, 10, 1091–1101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jones, T.L.; Baxter, M.A.; Khanduja, V. A quick guide to survey research. Ann. Roy. Coll. Surg. 2013, 95, 5–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Statistics Canada. List of Surveys in Collection; Statistics Canada: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 2017.
- Firestone, K.A.; Carson, J.W.; Mist, S.D.; Carson, K.M.; Jones, K.D. Interest in yoga among fibromyalgia patients: An international internet survey. Int. J. Yoga Therap. 2014, 24, 117–124. [Google Scholar]
- Kuss, D.J.; Lopez-Fernandez, O. Internet addiction and problematic internet use: A systematic review of clinical research. World J. Psychiatry 2016, 6, 143–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- CRTC. Telecom Regulatory Policy CRTC 2016-496. Modern Telecommunications Services—The Path Forward for Canada’s Digital Economy; CRTC: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 2016.
- ITU. Statistics; International Telecommunication Union: Geneva, Switzerland, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Craig, C.L.; Marshall, A.L.; Sjostrom, M.; Bauman, A.E.; Booth, M.L.; Ainsworth, B.E.; Pratt, M.; Ekelund, U.; Yngve, A.; Sallis, J.F.; et al. International physical activity questionnaire: 12-Country reliability and validity. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 2003, 35, 1381–1395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frehlich, L.; Friedenreich, C.; Nettel-Aguirre, A.; Schipperijn, J.; McCormack, G.R. Using accelerometer/gps data to validate a neighborhood-adapted version of the international physical activity questionnaire (ipaq). J. Meas. Phys. Behav. 2018, 1, 181–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frehlich, L.; Friedenreich, C.; Nettel-Aguirre, A.; McCormack, G.R. Test-retest reliability of a modified international physical activity questionnaire (ipaq) to capture neighbourhood physical activity. J. Hum. Sport Exerc. 2018, 13, 174–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McInerney, M.; Csizmadi, I.; Friedenreich, C.M.; Uribe, F.A.; Nettel-Aguirre, A.; McLaren, L.; Potestio, M.; Sandalack, B.; McCormack, G.R. Associations between the neighbourhood food environment, neighbourhood socioeconomic status, and diet quality: An observational study. BMC Public Health 2016, 16, 984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McCormack, G.R.; Friedenreich, C.; McLaren, L.; Potestio, M.; Sandalack, B.; Csizmadi, I. Interactions between neighbourhood urban form and socioeconomic status and their associations with anthropometric measurements in canadian adults. J. Environ. Public Health 2017, 2017, 5042614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- McCormack, G.R.; Friedenreich, C.; Sandalack, B.A.; Giles–Corti, B.; Doyle-Baker, P.K.; Shiell, A. The relationship between cluster-analysis derived walkability and local recreational and transportation walking among canadian adults. Health Place 2012, 18, 1079–1087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Choi, J.; Lee, M.; Lee, J.K.; Kang, D.; Choi, J.Y. Correlates associated with participation in physical activity among adults: A systematic review of reviews and update. BMC Public Health 2017, 17, 356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cerin, E.; Conway, T.L.; Cain, K.L.; Kerr, J.; De Bourdeaudhuij, I.; Owen, N.; Reis, R.S.; Sarmiento, O.L.; Hinckson, E.A.; Salvo, D.; et al. Sharing good news across the world: Developing comparable scores across 12 countries for the neighborhood environment walkability scale (news). BMC Public Health 2013, 13, 309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jack, E.; McCormack, G.R. The associations between objectively-determined and self-reported urban form characteristics and neighborhood-based walking in adults. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2014, 11, 71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Christian, H.E.; Bull, F.C.; Middleton, N.J.; Knuiman, M.W.; Divitini, M.L.; Hooper, P.; Amarasinghe, A.; Giles-Corti, B. How important is the land use mix measure in understanding walking behaviour? Results from the reside study. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2011, 8, 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Duncan, D.T.; Meline, J.; Kestens, Y.; Day, K.; Elbel, B.; Trasande, L.; Chaix, B. Walk score, transportation mode choice, and walking among french adults: A gps, accelerometer, and mobility survey study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2016, 13, 611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suminski, R.R.; Poston, W.S.; Petosa, R.L.; Stevens, E.; Katzenmoyer, L.M. Features of the neighborhood environment and walking by U.S. Adults. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2005, 28, 149–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chiu, M.; Shah, B.R.; Maclagan, L.C.; Rezai, M.R.; Austin, P.C.; Tu, J.V. Walk score(r) and the prevalence of utilitarian walking and obesity among ontario adults: A cross-sectional study. Health Rep. 2015, 26, 3–10. [Google Scholar]
- Carr, L.J.; Dunsiger, S.I.; Marcus, B.H. Walk score as a global estimate of neighborhood walkability. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2010, 39, 460–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carr, L.J.; Dunsiger, S.I.; Marcus, B.H. Validation of walk score for estimating access to walkable amenities. Br. J. Sports Med. 2011, 45, 1144–1148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nykiforuk, C.I.; McGetrick, J.A.; Crick, K.; Johnson, J.A. Check the score: Field validation of street smart walk score in alberta, canada. Prev. Med. Rep. 2016, 4, 532–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hajna, S.; Ross, N.A.; Joseph, L.; Harper, S.; Dasgupta, K. Neighbourhood walkability, daily steps and utilitarian walking in canadian adults. BMJ Open 2015, 5, e008964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thielman, J.; Manson, H.; Chiu, M.; Copes, R.; Rosella, L.C. Residents of highly walkable neighbourhoods in canadian urban areas do substantially more physical activity: A cross-sectional analysis. CMAJ Open 2016, 4, E720–E728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Hazzaa, H.M.; Abahussain, N.A.; Al-Sobayel, H.I.; Qahwaji, D.M.; Musaiger, A.O. Physical activity, sedentary behaviors and dietary habits among saudi adolescents relative to age, gender and region. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2011, 8, 140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- McCormack, G.R.; Giles-Corti, B.; Bulsara, M. The relationship between destination proximity, destination mix and physical activity behaviors. Prev. Med. 2008, 46, 33–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cerin, E.; Saelens, B.E.; Sallis, J.F.; Frank, L.D. Neighborhood environment walkability scale: Validity and development of a short form. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 2006, 38, 1682–1691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Landis, J.R.; Koch, G.G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977, 33, 159–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Humpel, N.; Owen, N.; Leslie, E. Environmental factors associated with adults’ participation in physical activity: A review. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2002, 22, 188–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Madsen, T.; Schipperijn, J.; Christiansen, L.B.; Nielsen, T.S.; Troelsen, J. Developing suitable buffers to capture transport cycling behavior. Front. Public Health 2014, 2, 61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Spielman, S.E.; Yoo, E.H. The spatial dimensions of neighborhood effects. Soc. Sci. Med. 2009, 68, 1098–1105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Adams, M.A.; Ryan, S.; Kerr, J.; Sallis, J.F.; Patrick, K.; Frank, L.D.; Norman, G.J. Validation of the neighborhood environment walkability scale (news) items using geographic information systems. J. Phys. Act. Health 2009, 6 (Suppl. 1), S113–S123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sallis, J.F.; Saelens, B.E. Assessment of physical activity by self-report: Status, limitations, and future directions. Res. Q Exerc. Sport 2000, 71, S1–S14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Demographic Characteristic | Low Walkable (n = 92) Estimate | Medium Walkable (n = 85) Estimate | High Walkable (n = 84) Estimate | Total (n = 261) Estimate |
---|---|---|---|---|
Age in years, mean (SD) * | 57.1 (12.5) | 52.5 (13.4) | 52.0 (13.2) | 53.9 (13.2) |
Female, n (%) | 61 (66.3) | 63 (74.2) | 57 (67.9) | 181 (69.4) |
Dependents living in the home, n (%) | ||||
One or more aged <6 years | 8 (8.7) | 15 (17.7) | 17 (20.2) | 40 (15.3) |
One or more aged 6–18 years | 17 (18.5) | 25 (29.4) | 19 (22.6) | 61 (23.4) |
Dogs living in the home, n (%) | 38 (41.3) | 36 (42.4) | 32 (38.1) | 106 (40.6) |
Had access to a motor vehicle for personal use, n (%) | 92 (100.0) | 82 (96.5) | 81 (96.4) | 255 (97.7) |
Had access to a bicycle for personal use, n (%) | 74 (80.4) | 67 (78.8) | 73 (86.9) | 214 (82.0) |
Highest level of education, n (%) | ||||
Lower than University | 35 (38.0) | 22 (25.9) | 25 (29.8) | 82 (31.4) |
University | 57 (62.0) | 63 (74.1) | 59 (70.2) | 179 (68.6) |
Physical Activity | Time 1 % (n) | Time 2 % (n) | p0 | κ (95% CI) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Bicycled for transportation in perceived neighbourhood | 4.2 (11) | 6.5 (17) | 94.6 | 0.47 (0.24 to 0.71) * |
Walked for transportation in perceived neighbourhood | 73.2 (191) | 67.8 (177) | 82.4 | 0.58 (0.47 to 0.69) * |
Walked for recreation in perceived neighbourhood | 57.9 (151) | 54.0 (141) | 73.2 | 0.46 (0.35 to 0.57) * |
Vigorous physical activity in perceived neighbourhood | 44.1 (115) | 41.4 (108) | 76.6 | 0.52 (0.42 to 0.63) * |
Moderate physical activity in perceived neighbourhood | 35.3 (92) | 37.9 (99) | 72.8 | 0.41 (0.30 to 0.53) * |
Physical Activity Measure | Time 1 Mean (SD), Median | Time 2 Mean (SD), Median | ICC (95% CI) | ρ (95% CI) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Bicycling for transportation during the last 7 days (in days) | 0.13 (0.73), 0 | 0.15 (0.70), 0 | 0.52 (0.43 to 0.60) * | 0.50 (0.40 to 0.58) * |
Usual time spent bicycling for transportation on one of those days (in minutes) | 0.77 (4.64), 0 | 1.78 (7.78), 0 | 0.40 (0.29 to 0.49) * | 0.48 (0.39 to 0.57) * |
Computed: Total transportation minutes/week by bicycle | 2.38 (15.41), 0 | 4.27 (22.02), 0 | 0.60 (0.52 to 0.68) * | 0.49 (0.40 to 0.58) * |
Walking for transportation during the last 7 days (in days) | 2.60 (2.39), 2 | 2.27 (2.30), 2 | 0.66 (0.58 to 0.72) * | 0.67 (0.60 to 0.73) * |
Usual time spent walking for transportation on one of those days (in minutes) | 23.72 (23.67), 20 | 20.90 (21.50), 20 | 0.57 (0.48 to 0.65) * | 0.63 (0.55 to 0.70) * |
Computed: Total transportation minutes/week by walking | 92.84 (131.59), 50 | 77.13 (109.51), 40 | 0.64 (0.56 to 0.71) * | 0.69 (0.62 to 0.75) * |
Walking for leisure during the last 7 days (in days) | 2.01 (2.39), 1 | 1.95 (2.44), 1 | 0.60 (0.52 to 0.67) * | 0.55 (0.46 to 0.63) * |
Usual time spent walking for leisure on one of those days (in minutes) | 26.36 (33.06), 20 | 25.23 (31.36), 20 | 0.50 (0.40 to 0.58) * | 0.56 (0.47 to 0.64) * |
Computed: Total minutes/week spent walking for recreation, leisure, or exercise | 95.69 (156.25), 30 | 93.91 (144.50), 25 | 0.69 (0.61 to 0.74) * | 0.58 (0.49 to 0.66) * |
Undertaking vigorous physical activity for leisure during the last 7 days (in days) | 1.21 (1.67), 0 | 1.13 (1.69), 0 | 0.55 (0.46 to 0.63) * | 0.55 (0.46 to 0.63) * |
Usual time spent in vigorous physical activity for leisure on one of those days (in minutes) | 20.67 (28.63), 0 | 19.27 (33.32), 0 | 0.55 (0.46 to 0.63) * | 0.58 (0.49 to 0.65) * |
Computed: Total minutes/week spent in vigorous physical activity | 59.18 (98.11), 0 | 56.74 (137.46), 0 | 0.49 (0.39 to 0.57) * | 0.58 (0.49 to 0.66) * |
Undertaking moderate physical activity for leisure during the last 7 days (in days) | 0.98 (1.67), 0 | 1.08 (1.78), 0 | 0.50 (0.41 to 0.59) * | 0.48 (0.38 to 0.56) * |
Usual time spent in moderate physical activity for leisure on one of those days (in minutes) | 13.60 (21.43), 0 | 16.49 (25.07), 0 | 0.37 (0.26 to 0.47) * | 0.41 (0.31 to 0.51) * |
Computed: Total minutes/week spent in moderate physical activity | 39.18 (76.43), 0 | 48.54 (94.02), 0 | 0.49 (0.39 to 0.57) * | 0.47 (0.37 to 0.56) * |
Computed: Total minutes/week active ^ | 289.25 (298.65), 210 | 280.59 (295.80), 210 | 0.70 (0.63 to 0.76) * | 0.75 (0.69 to 0.80) * |
Physical Activity Measure | n | Time 1 Mean (SD), Median | n | Time 2 Mean (SD), Median | n | ICC (95% CI) | n | ρ (95% CI) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bicycling for transportation during the last 7 days (in days) | 11 | 3.09 (1.92), 2 | 17 | 2.29 (1.65), 1 | 7 | 0.70 (0.00 to 0.94) * | 7 | 0.74 (−0.03 to 0.96) |
Usual time spent bicycling for transportation on one of those days (in minutes) | 11 | 18.18 (14.54), 15 | 17 | 27.35 (15.52), 25 | 7 | 0.81 (0.25 to 0.97) * | 7 | 0.87 (0.35 to 0.98) * |
Computed: Total transportation minutes/week by bicycle | 11 | 56.36 (53.16), 40 | 17 | 65.59 (60.08), 45 | 7 | 0.85 (0.37 to 0.97) * | 7 | 0.75 (−0.01 to 0.96) |
Walking for transportation during the last 7 days (in days) | 191 | 3.55 (2.10), 3 | 177 | 3.35 (2.05), 3 | 161 | 0.60 (0.49 to 0.69) * | 161 | 0.59 (0.48 to 0.68) * |
Usual time spent walking for transportation on one of those days (in minutes) | 191 | 32.41 (21.99), 30 | 177 | 30.82 (19.38), 30 | 161 | 0.44 (0.31 to 0.56) * | 161 | 0.52 (0.39 to 0.62) * |
Computed: Total transportation minutes/week by walking | 191 | 126.86 (139.12), 75 | 177 | 113.73 (116.32), 60 | 161 | 0.59 (0.48 to 0.68) * | 161 | 0.62 (0.52 to 0.71) * |
Walking for leisure during the last 7 days (in days) | 151 | 3.48 (2.18), 3 | 141 | 3.62 (2.24), 3 | 111 | 0.75 (0.65 to 0.82) * | 111 | 0.73 (0.63 to 0.81) * |
Usual time spent walking for leisure on one of those days (in minutes) | 151 | 45.56 (31.83), 40 | 141 | 46.70 (28.57), 40 | 111 | 0.55 (0.40 to 0.67) * | 111 | 0.66 (0.54 to 0.75) * |
Computed: Total minutes/week spent walking for recreation, leisure, or exercise | 151 | 165.40 (175.24), 120 | 141 | 173.83 (157.44), 120 | 111 | 0.71 (0.61 to 0.79) * | 111 | 0.72 (0.62 to 0.80) * |
Undertaking vigorous physical activity for leisure during the last 7 days (in days) | 115 | 2.76 (1.44), 3 | 108 | 2.74 (1.57), 2 | 81 | 0.49 (0.30 to 0.64) * | 81 | 0.47 (0.28 to 0.62) * |
Usual time spent in vigorous physical activity for leisure on one of those days (in minutes) | 115 | 46.91 (25.05), 45 | 108 | 46.57 (37.60), 40 | 81 | 0.44 (0.24 to 0.60) * | 81 | 0.66 (0.51 to 0.77) * |
Computed: Total minutes/week spent in vigorous physical activity | 115 | 134.30 (108.50), 100 | 108 | 137.13 (186.51), 100 | 81 | 0.37 (0.17 to 0.54) * | 81 | 0.49 (0.30 to 0.64) * |
Undertaking moderate physical activity for leisure during the last 7 days (in days) | 92 | 2.77 (1.71), 2 | 99 | 2.85 (1.82), 2 | 60 | 0.45 (0.22 to 0.63) * | 60 | 0.50 (0.29 to 0.67) * |
Usual time spent in moderate physical activity for leisure on one of those days (in minutes) | 92 | 38.59 (18.36), 30 | 99 | 43.48 (21.95), 40 | 60 | 0.34 (0.09 to 0.54) * | 60 | 0.46 (0.23 to 0.64) * |
Computed: Total minutes/week spent in moderate physical activity | 92 | 111.14 (92.77), 90 | 99 | 127.98 (114.80), 90 | 60 | 0.46 (0.23 to 0.64) * | 60 | 0.48 (0.26 to 0.65) * |
Computed: Total minutes/week active ^ | 235 | 321.26 (297.96), 230 | 227 | 322.62 (295.03), 240 | 217 | 0.68 (0.60 to 0.74) * | 217 | 0.76 (0.69 to 0.81) * |
Adjusted Logistic Regression Odds Ratios (OR) for the Association between Participation and Neighbourhood Walkability | ||||||
Walkability | Cycled for Transportation OR (95% CI) | Walked for Transportation OR (95% CI) | Walked for Recreation OR (95% CI) | Vigorous Physical Activity OR (95% CI) | Moderate Physical Activity OR (95% CI) | |
Low | Reference Group | Reference Group | Reference Group | Reference Group | Reference Group | |
Medium | 0.69 (0.14 to 3.32) | 1.20 (0.61 to 2.34) | 1.17 (0.62 to 2.21) | 1.42 (0.75 to 2.66) | 2.02 (1.06 to 3.86) * | |
High | 0.87 (0.20 to 3.81) | 3.02 (1.39 to 6.56) * | 0.78 (0.42 to 1.47) | 1.32 (0.70 to 2.49) | 1.61 (0.83 to 3.12) | |
Adjusted Linear Regression Unstandardized Regression Coefficients (b) for the Association between Duration and Neighbourhood Walkability | ||||||
Walkability | Min/week Cycling for Transportation b (95% CI) | Min/week Walking for Transportation b (95% CI) | Min/week Walking for Recreation b (95% CI) | Min/week Vigorous Physical Activity b (95% CI) | Min/week Moderate Physical Activity b (95% CI) | Min/week Total Activity ^ b (95% CI) |
Low | Reference Group | Reference Group | Reference Group | Reference Group | Reference Group | Reference Group |
Medium | −0.76 (−5.44 to 3.92) | 7.75 (−30.38 to 45.89) | −6.80 (−52.08 to 38.48) | −8.17 (−37.34 to 20.99) | 0.63 (−22.29 to 23.54) | −7.35 (−91.91 to 77.20) |
High | −1.20 (−5.89 to 3.50) | 41.08 (2.87 to 79.30) * | −14.57 (−59.94 to 30.81) | 17.64 (−11.59 to 46.87) | 9.10 (−13.87 to 32.06) | 52.05 (−32.69 to 136.79) |
Adjusted Linear Regression Unstandardized Regression Coefficients (b) for the Association between Duration and Neighbourhood Walk Score® | ||||||
Walkability | Min/week Cycling for Transportation b (95% CI) | Min/week Walking for Transportation b (95% CI) | Min/week Walking for Recreation b (95% CI) | Min/week Vigorous Physical Activity b (95% CI) | Min/week Moderate Physical Activity b (95% CI) | Min/week Total Activity ^ b (95% CI) |
Walk Score | −0.03 (−0.17 to 0.10) | 1.40 (0.32 to 2.47) * | −0.32 (−1.59 to 0.96) | 0.50 (−0.32 to 1.33) | 0.12 (−0.53 to 0.76) | 1.67 (−0.72 to 4.06) |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Frehlich, L.; Blackstaffe, A.; McCormack, G.R. Test-Retest Reliability and Walk Score® Neighbourhood Walkability Comparison of an Online Perceived Neighbourhood-Specific Adaptation of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ). Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 1917. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16111917
Frehlich L, Blackstaffe A, McCormack GR. Test-Retest Reliability and Walk Score® Neighbourhood Walkability Comparison of an Online Perceived Neighbourhood-Specific Adaptation of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ). International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2019; 16(11):1917. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16111917
Chicago/Turabian StyleFrehlich, Levi, Anita Blackstaffe, and Gavin R. McCormack. 2019. "Test-Retest Reliability and Walk Score® Neighbourhood Walkability Comparison of an Online Perceived Neighbourhood-Specific Adaptation of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ)" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 16, no. 11: 1917. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16111917
APA StyleFrehlich, L., Blackstaffe, A., & McCormack, G. R. (2019). Test-Retest Reliability and Walk Score® Neighbourhood Walkability Comparison of an Online Perceived Neighbourhood-Specific Adaptation of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ). International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(11), 1917. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16111917