A checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of validation studies on self-report instruments for physical activity and sedentary behavior.

Maria Hagströmer, Barbara Ainsworth, Lydia Kwak, Heather R. Bowles

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

20 Scopus citations

Abstract

The quality of methodological papers assessing physical activity instruments depends upon the rigor of a study's design. We present a checklist to assess key criteria for instrument validation studies. A Medline/PubMed search was performed to identify guidelines for evaluating the methodological quality of instrument validation studies. Based upon the literature, a pilot version of a checklist was developed consisting of 21 items with 3 subscales: 1) quality of the reported data (9 items: assess whether the reported information is sufficient to make an unbiased assessment of the findings); 2) external validity of the results (3 items: assess the extent to which the findings are generalizable); 3) internal validity of the study (9 items: assess the rigor of the study design). The checklist was tested for interrater reliability and feasibility with 6 raters. Raters viewed the checklist as helpful for reviewing studies. They suggested minor wording changes for 8 items to clarify intent. One item was divided into 2 items for a total of 22 items. Checklists may be useful to assess the quality of studies designed to validate physical activity instruments. Future research should test checklist internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and criterion validity.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)S29-36
JournalJournal of physical activity & health
Volume9 Suppl 1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2012

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'A checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of validation studies on self-report instruments for physical activity and sedentary behavior.'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this