MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169895050 · doi:10.1123/jpah.2.2.216

Convergent Validity of the Physical Activity Questionnaire for Adults: The New Member of the PAQ Family

2005· article· en· W2169895050 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jennifer L. Copeland, Kent C. Kowalski, Rachel Donen, Mark S. Tremblay

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physical Activity and Health · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPhysical activityPsychologyConvergent validityClinical psychologyRecallTest validityPsychometricsDevelopmental psychologyGerontologyMedicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: To accommodate the need for longitudinal physical activity research, we developed the Physical Activity Questionnaire for Adults (PAQ-AD). The PAQ-AD is an adult version of the PAQ-C and PAQ-A questionnaires which were developed for older children and adolescents, respectively. Methods: Two studies assessed the convergent validity of the PAQ-AD using a series of self-report tools and direct measurement of physical activity. Results: In the first sample ( N = 247), the PAQ-AD was significantly related to a series of self-report tools ( r = 0.53 to 0.64). In the second sample ( N = 184), the PAQ-AD was significantly related to the self-report tools ( r = 0.56 to 0.63), a physical activity recall interview ( r = 0.24), and to direct measurements of physical activity ( r = 0.26 to 0.43). Conclusion: These results provide preliminary validity evidence for the PAQ-AD and suggest the PAQ “family” of questionnaires might be advantageous for longitudinal research assessing physical activity from childhood to adulthood.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.869
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations54
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physical Activity and HealthSame topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207