Next Article in Journal
Cd(II) Adsorption on Different Modified Rice Straws under FTIR Spectroscopy as Influenced by Initial pH, Cd(II) Concentration, and Ionic Strength
Previous Article in Journal
Effects of High Intensity Interval Training on Executive Function in Children Aged 8–12 Years
Review

Reliability and Concurrent Validity of Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ): A Systematic Review

1
Department of Curriculum and Instruction, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA
2
Institute of Physical Education, and Bioinformatics Center, Henan University, Kaifeng 475001, China
3
Department of Kinesiology, William Paterson University, Wayne, NJ 07470, USA
4
Department of Kinesiology, California State University, Fullerton, CA 92831, USA
5
Department of Health, Kinesiology, and Nutrition, The University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78249, USA
6
GALENO research group, Department of Physical Education, Faculty of Education Sciences, University of Cadiz, 11519 Puerto Real, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16(21), 4128; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16214128
Received: 24 August 2019 / Revised: 3 October 2019 / Accepted: 10 October 2019 / Published: 26 October 2019
(This article belongs to the Section Global Health)
This study aimed to systematically review previous studies on the reliability and concurrent validity of the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ). A systematic literature search was conducted (n = 26) using the online EBSCOHost databases, PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar up to September 2019. A previously developed coding sheet was used to collect the data. The Modified Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies was employed to assess risk of bias and study quality. It was found that GPAQ was primarily revalidated in adult populations in Asian and European countries. The sample size ranged from 43 to 2657 with a wide age range (i.e., 15–79 years old). Different populations yielded inconsistent results concerning the reliability and validity of the GPAQ. Short term (i.e., one- to two-week interval) and long-term (i.e., two- to three-month apart) test–retest reliability was good to very good. The concurrent validity using accelerometers, pedometers, and physical activity (PA) log was poor to fair. The GPAQ data and accelerometer/pedometer/PA log data were not compared using the same measurements in some validation studies. Studies with more rigorous research designs are needed before any conclusions concerning the concurrent validity of GPAQ can be reached. View Full-Text
Keywords: adult physical activity questionnaire; international perspective; revalidation adult physical activity questionnaire; international perspective; revalidation
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Keating, X.D.; Zhou, K.; Liu, X.; Hodges, M.; Liu, J.; Guan, J.; Phelps, A.; Castro-Piñero, J. Reliability and Concurrent Validity of Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ): A Systematic Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 4128. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16214128

AMA Style

Keating XD, Zhou K, Liu X, Hodges M, Liu J, Guan J, Phelps A, Castro-Piñero J. Reliability and Concurrent Validity of Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ): A Systematic Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2019; 16(21):4128. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16214128

Chicago/Turabian Style

Keating, Xiaofen D., Ke Zhou, Xiaolu Liu, Michael Hodges, Jingwen Liu, Jianmin Guan, Ashley Phelps, and Jose Castro-Piñero. 2019. "Reliability and Concurrent Validity of Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ): A Systematic Review" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 16, no. 21: 4128. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16214128

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop