Psychometric Properties of the IPAQ: A Validation Study in a Sample of Northern Franco-Ontarians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) has received significant attention since the late 1990s. As it currently stands, its long version has been translated in English, German, Icelandic, Korean, Polish, Spanish, Turkish, and Vietnamese. However no data originating from the self-administered long version (last 7 days) of the IPAQ (IPAQ-SALV) is available for French Canadians. This study developed a self-administered long version (last 7 days) of the IPAQ in Canadian French (IPAQ-SALVCF) and assessed its psychometric properties. METHODS: The original IPAQ-SALV was linguistically translated, back-translated, and then reviewed in a focus group to ensure its meaning had been retained. Data were collected on a sample of 34 Francophones from Northern Ontario, and the results compared with step counts assessed by 7-day pedometer recording. Test-retest reliability was examined with a 24-hour delay between questionnaire completion on day 8 and day 9 of the protocol. Convergent validity was assessed by comparing IPAQ-SALVCF (last 7 days) results to average step counts over a 7-day period. RESULTS: Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) revealed that the IPAQ-SALVCF results were stable between days. The ICC for total activity scores was highest at 0.93 (CI: 0.86 to 0.97). Total activity scores were also significantly related to pedometer step counts (Pearson r = .66 P < .01). These results confirm those obtained in prior research. CONCLUSION: The IPAQ-SALVCF is a reliable and valid measure of physical activity for French Canadians.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".