Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40715989›Full record

SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2025

Psychometric Properties of Physical Activity Questionnaires for Children and Adolescents: An Updated Systematic Review.

Mahdi Rostami Haji Abadi, Nguden Kwaghbo, Ogochukwu Kelechi Onyeso, Farzana Sadia, Judy Katterine Benavides Castro, Diego Augusto Santos Silva, Yiping Yan, Yangyang Shen, Zdenek Hamrik, Olga L Sarmiento and 3 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Mahdi Rostami Haji AbadiFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, AB, T1K 3M4, Canada.
Nguden KwaghboFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, AB, T1K 3M4, Canada.
Ogochukwu Kelechi OnyesoFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, AB, T1K 3M4, Canada.
Farzana SadiaFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, AB, T1K 3M4, Canada.
Judy Katterine Benavides CastroSchool of Medicine, Universidad de Los Andes, Cra 1 18ª-12, Bogotá, Colombia.
Diego Augusto Santos SilvaDepartment of Physical Education, Sports Center, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, 88040-900, Brazil.
Yiping YanSchool of Physical Education, Shanghai University of Sport, Yangpu District, Shanghai, 200438, China.
Yangyang ShenSchool of Physical Education, Shanghai University of Sport, Yangpu District, Shanghai, 200438, China.
Zdenek HamrikFaculty of Physical Culture, Palacký University Olomouc, Tr. Míru 117, 779 00, Olomouc, Czech Republic.
Olga L SarmientoSchool of Medicine, Universidad de Los Andes, Cra 1 18ª-12, Bogotá, Colombia.
Yang LiuSchool of Physical Education, Shanghai University of Sport, Yangpu District, Shanghai, 200438, China.
Mark S TremblayHealthy Active Living and Obesity Research Group, CHEO Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, K1H 8L1, Canada.
Richard LaroucheFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, AB, T1K 3M4, Canada. richard.larouche@uleth.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-8850-6895

Funding

CIHR ECP 184184CIHR PJT 183705Prentice Institute for Global Population and Economy G00004116
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundQuestionnaires remain the most feasible method for large-scale physical activity (PA) surveillance. However, previous systematic reviews concluded that existing questionnaires had unsatisfactory psychometric properties.

objectivesThis systematic review aimed to summarize and evaluate the measurement properties of self- and proxy-reported physical activity (PA) measures in children and adolescents published between 2018 and July 2024, thereby updating a previous review. This review also aimed to recommend the best available questionnaire(s) for young children (age < 6 years), children (age ≥ 6 to < 12 years), and adolescents (age ≥ 12 to < 18 years).

methodsThe COnsensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) Guidelines for Systematic Reviews of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures were followed for conducting and reporting this systematic review. PubMed, EMBASE, and SPORTDiscus databases were searched for papers published between 2018 and July 2024. The peer-reviewed papers were included if published in Arabic, Chinese, Czech, English, French, Hindi, Nepali, Portuguese, Spanish, Swedish or Thai and assessed at least one of the measurement properties of self- or proxy-reported PA measures in young children, children, and adolescents. Papers were excluded if they measured PA with interview or diary or reported construct validity against non-PA measures (e.g., body mass index). The results of studies from the previous systematic review that reported test-retest reliability and construct validity of the questionnaires included in this systematic review were added to the pooled qualitative analyses and meta-analyses.

resultsA total of 106 papers were included which reported 177 studies related to content validity (n = 31), construct validity including hypotheses testing (n = 80), test-retest reliability (n = 65), and responsiveness (n = 1) of 71 questionnaires. None of the included questionnaires met the COSMIN criteria for sufficient content validity. Questionnaires with satisfactory construct validity (correlation r ≥ 0.4) were found in young children (n = 2; e.g., the Outdoor Playtime Recall), children (n = 2; e.g., Self-rating Scale of Physical Activity Intensity for Preschool Children), and adolescents (n = 8; e.g., the Spanish version of Physical Activity Unit 7 Item Screener, the Czech version of Youth Activity Profile). Questionnaires with sufficient test-retest reliability (≥ 0.7) were found in young children (n = 2; e.g., the Movement Behaviour Questionnaire for Baby and Children), children (n = 3; e.g., Diet and Physical Activity Behaviors in the Feel4Diabetes Study), and adolescents (n = 5; e.g., the 24-Hour Movement Behavior Questionnaire). The Physical Activity Questionnaire for older Children and Adolescents had sufficient test-retest reliability based on pooled qualitative analysis and meta-analyses. The best available questionnaires were the Outdoor Playtime Recall (for young children) and the Physical Activity Questionnaire for Older Children and Adolescents for children and adolescents.

conclusionThis systematic review update did not identify a PA questionnaire that met COSMIN standards for both construct validity and test-retest reliability, partly due to the low methodological quality of the studies. Researchers should improve the methodological rigor of future psychometric studies, particularly for content validity, by adopting standardized guidelines (e.g., COSMIN). We also recommend: (1) using comparator tools that have demonstrated reliable measurement properties in populations similar to the target group; (2) formulating hypotheses in advance to confirm construct validity; (3) selecting appropriate intervals between test and retest and ensuring consistent test conditions; and (4) providing evidence of PA stability between test and retest. Lastly, when developing questionnaires to measure total PA, researchers should include all relevant domains of PA and assess their relevance during the content validation process.

Indexed as

ExercisePsychometricsAdolescentChildChild, PreschoolHumansReproducibility of ResultsSelf ReportSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.