By purchasing this content you agree and accept the terms and conditions
Recent research highlights the potential value of differentiating between categories of physical activity intensities as predictors of health and well-being. This study sought to assess reliability and concurrent validity of sedentary (ie, 1 METs), low-light (ie, >1 and ≤2 METs; eg, playing cards), high-light (ie, >2 and <3 METs; eg, light walking), moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA, ≥3 METs), and “total activity” (≥2 METs) from the CHAMPS survey. Further, this study explored over-reporting and double-reporting.
CHAMPS data were gathered from the Seniors Neighborhood Quality of Life Study, an observational study of adults aged 65+ years conducted in 2 US regions.
Participants (N = 870) were 75.3 ± 6.8 years old, with 56% women and 71% white. The CHAMPS sedentary, low-light, high-light, total activity, and MVPA variables had acceptable test-retest reliability (ICCs 0.56−0.70). The CHAMPS high-light (ρ = 0.27), total activity (ρ = 0.34), and MVPA (ρ = 0.37) duration scales were moderately associated with accelerometry minutes of corresponding intensity, and the sedentary scale (ρ = 0.12) had a lower, but significant correlation. Results suggested that several CHAMPS items may be susceptible to over-reporting (eg, walking, housework).
CHAMPS items effectively measured high-light, total activity, and MVPA in seniors, but further refinement is needed for sedentary and low-light activity.
Hekler, Buman, Haskell, and King are with the Stanford Prevention Research Center, Stanford University, Stanford, CA. Conway, Cain, Sallis, and Kerr are with San Diego State University, San Diego, CA. Saelens is with the Seattle Children’s Hospital Research Institute and the University of Washington, Seattle, WA. Frank is with the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.