MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3165432107 · doi:10.1080/1091367x.2021.1922910

Validity of the Sedentary Behavior Questionnaire in European Older Adults Using English, Spanish, German and Danish Versions

2021· article· en· W3165432107 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Oriol Sansano-Nadal, Jason J. Wilson, Carme Martín-Borràs, Jan Christian Brønd, Mathias Skjødt, Paolo Caserotti, Marta Roqué i Figuls, Nicole E. Blackburn, Jochen Klenk, Dietrich Rothenbacher, Myriam Guerra-Balic, Manel Font-Farré, Michael Denkinger, Laura Coll‐Planas, Manuela Deidda, Emma McIntosh, Maria Giné‐Garriga, Mark A. Tully

Bibliographic record

VenueMeasurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeUniversität UlmUniversitat Ramon LlullSyddansk UniversitetUniversitat Autònoma de BarcelonaUniversitat de BarcelonaEuropean CommissionQueen's UniversityUlster UniversityUniversity of GlasgowQueen's University Belfast
KeywordsDanishGermanPsychologyPhysical activitySedentary behaviorClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPhysical therapyMedicineHistoryLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main aim of this study was to assess the criterion validity of the Sedentary Behavior Questionnaire (SBQ) to measure SB in community-dwelling older adults using thigh-measured accelerometry as the criterion method. 801 participants (75.6 ± 6.1 years old, 57.6% females) provided valid thigh-based accelerometer data (activPAL/Axivity) and completed the SBQ. Criterion validity was assessed using Spearman’s Rho coefficients. Bland–Altman plots, including 95% limits of agreement and Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), were used to assess the agreement between self-report and device-measured daily SB time. Strength of the association was examined using multiple linear regression. There was a weak correlation (Rho = 0.25, p < .001) between self-reported and device-based SB measures. The SBQ under-estimated daily SB time compared to accelerometry. Our results highlighted an overall weak-to-moderate correlation between measures, with significant differences between each country’s version. Researchers should be cautious when using the SBQ to provide an estimation of SB time in older adults.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.387
Threshold uncertainty score0.231

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations18
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMeasurement in Physical Education and Exercise ScienceSame topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207