Skip Navigation



American Journal of Epidemiology Advance Access published online on August 1, 2007

American Journal of Epidemiology, doi:10.1093/aje/kwm148
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
166/7/832    most recent
kwm148v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ferrari, P.
Right arrow Articles by Matthews, C. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ferrari, P.
Right arrow Articles by Matthews, C. E.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

American Journal of Epidemiology © The Author 2007. Published by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

PRACTICE OF EPIDEMIOLOGY

The Role of Measurement Error in Estimating Levels of Physical Activity

Pietro Ferrari1, Christine Friedenreich2 and Charles E. Matthews3

1 Nutrition and Hormones Group, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
2 Division of Population Health and Information, Alberta Cancer Board, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
3 Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN

Correspondence to Dr. Pietro Ferrari, Nutrition and Hormones Group, International Agency for Research on Cancer, 150 Cours Albert Thomas 69372 Lyon, France (e-mail: ferrari{at}iarc.fr; www.iarc.fr).

Received for publication November 15, 2006. Accepted for publication April 9, 2007.

Epidemiologic studies have demonstrated that physical inactivity is an important determinant of numerous chronic diseases. However, self-reported estimates of physical activity contain measurement errors responsible for attenuating relative risk estimates. A validation study conducted in 2002–2003 at the Alberta Cancer Board (Canada) included a physical activity questionnaire, four 7-day physical activity logs, and four sets of accelerometer data from 154 study subjects (51% women) aged 35–65 years. The authors used a measurement error model to evaluate validity of the different types of physical activity assessment, and the attenuation factors, after taking into account error correlations between self-reported measurements. The validity coefficients, which express the correlation between measured and true exposure, were higher for accelerometers (0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.76, 0.85) compared with the physical activity log (0.57, 95% CI: 0.47, 0.66) and questionnaire measurements (0.26, 95% CI: 0.12, 0.40). The estimate of the attenuation factor for questionnaires was 0.13 (95% CI: 0.05, 0.23). Accuracy of physical activity questionnaire measurements was higher for men than for women, for younger individuals, and for those with a lower body mass index. Because the degree of attenuation in relative risk estimates is substantial, after the role of error correlations was considered, validation studies quantifying the impact of measurement errors on physical activity estimates are essential to evaluate the impact of physical inactivity on health.

bias (epidemiology); measurement error; questionnaires

Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; PA LOG, physical activity log; PAQ, physical activity questionnaire


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
Y. Bao and D. S. Michaud
Physical Activity and Pancreatic Cancer Risk: A Systematic Review
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., October 1, 2008; 17(10): 2671 - 2682.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.