Are Self-report Measures Able to Define Individuals as Physically Active or Inactive?

Area of Science:

• Exercise physiology
• Public health surveillance
• Biostatistics

Background:

• Accurate assessment of physical activity (PA) is crucial for public health.
• Self-report questionnaires are commonly used but their validity against objective measures is debated.
• Understanding discrepancies is key to improving PA prevalence estimates.

Purpose of the Study:

• To assess the agreement between self-report PA questionnaires and objective PA measurements.
• To evaluate how these different methods define the prevalence of individuals meeting PA recommendations.

Main Methods:

• 1713 healthy adults from nine European countries participated.
• Objective PA was measured using calibrated heart rate and movement sensors.
• Self-reported PA was assessed using the Recent Physical Activity Questionnaire (RPAQ), International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ), and European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition Physical Activity Questionnaire (EPIC-PAQ).

Main Results:

• Prevalence of sufficient activity varied significantly across measures (IPAQ: 84.2%, RPAQ: 87.6%, EPIC-PAQ: 39.9%, objective: 48.5%).
• Self-report methods demonstrated low to moderate sensitivity in correctly classifying inactive individuals.
• Agreement between objective and self-reported PA was low (Kappa values ranging from 0.07 to 0.19).

Conclusions:

• Self-reported PA data may lead to overestimation of population activity levels.
• The modest agreement highlights the need for cautious interpretation of self-reported PA prevalence.
• Objective PA measurement is recommended for large-scale cohort studies and surveillance systems.