Validity and Relative Validity of Alternative Methods of Assessing Physical Activity in Epidemiologic Studies: Findings From the Men’s Lifestyle Validation Study

Abstract

Abstract In the Men’s Lifestyle Validation Study (2011–2013), we examined the validity and relative validity of a physical activity questionnaire (PAQ), a Web-based 24-hour recall (Activities Completed Over Time in 24 Hours (ACT24)), and an accelerometer by multiple comparison methods. Over the course of 1 year, 609 men completed 2 PAQs, two 7-day accelerometer measurements, at least 1 doubly labeled water (DLW) physical activity level (PAL) measurement (n = 100 with repeat measurements), and 4 ACT24s; they also measured their resting pulse rate. A subset (n = 197) underwent dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (n = 99 with repeated measurements). The method of triads was used to estimate correlations with true activity using DLW PAL, accelerometry, and the PAQ or ACT24 as alternative comparison measures. Estimated correlations of the PAQ with true activity were 0.60 (95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.52, 0.68) for total activity, 0.69 (95% CI: 0.61, 0.79) for moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), and 0.76 (95% CI: 0.62, 0.93) for vigorous activity. Corresponding correlations for total activity were 0.53 (95% CI: 0.45, 0.63) for the average of 4 ACT24s and 0.68 (95% CI: 0.61, 0.75) for accelerometry. Total activity and MVPA measured by PAQ, ACT24, and accelerometry were all significantly correlated with body fat percentage and resting pulse rate, which are physiological indicators of physical activity. Using a combination of comparison methods, we found the PAQ and accelerometry to have moderate validity for assessing physical activity, especially MVPA, in epidemiologic studies.