↓ Skip to main content

Validation of two short questionnaires assessing physical activity in colorectal cancer patients

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Validation of two short questionnaires assessing physical activity in colorectal cancer patients
Published in
BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13102-018-0096-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hege Berg Henriksen, Sveinung Berntsen, Ingvild Paur, Manuela Zucknick, Anne Juul Skjetne, Siv Kjølsrud Bøhn, Christine Henriksen, Sigbjørn Smeland, Monica Hauger Carlsen, Rune Blomhoff

Abstract

In order to investigate the impact of adherence to recommendations of physical activity and sedentary time on health outcomes in clinical trials, there is a need for feasible tools such as questionnaires that can give representative estimates of these measures. The primary aim of the present study was to validate two such questionnaires and their ability to estimate adherence to the recommendations of physical activity defined as moderate-to- vigorous physical activity or moderate physical activity of at least 150 min/week in colorectal cancer patients. Secondarily, self-reported sedentary time from the HUNT-PAQ was also evaluated. Participants from 'The Norwegian dietary guidelines and colorectal cancer survival-study' (CRC-NORDIET study) completed two short questionnaires; the NORDIET-FFQ (n = 78) and the HUNT-PAQ (n = 77). The physical activity monitor SenseWear Armband Mini was used as the reference method during seven consecutive days. The NORDIET-FFQ provided better estimates of time in moderate-to- vigorous physical activity and moderate physical activity than the HUNT-PAQ. The NORDIET-FFQ was unable to rank individual time in moderate-to- vigorous physical activity and moderate physical activity (Spearman's rho = 0.08, p = 0.509 and Spearman's rho rho = 0.01, p = 0.402, respectively). All intensities were under-reported by the HUNT-PAQ, but ranking of individual time in moderate physical activity and sedentary time were acceptable among women only (Spearman's rho = 0.37, p = 0.027 and Spearman's rho = 0.36, p = 0.035, respectively). The HUNT-PAQ correctly classified 71% of those not meeting the recommendations (sensitivity), and the NORDIET-FFQ correctly classified 63% of those who met the recommendations (specificity). About 67% and 33% reported to meet the recommendation of moderate-to- vigorous physical activity with the NORDIET-FFQ and HUNT-PAQ, respectively, whereas 55% actually met the moderate-to- vigorous physical activity according to the SenseWear Armband Mini. The NORDIET-FFQ provided better specificity and better estimates of PA than the HUNT-PAQ. The HUNT-PAQ provided better sensitivity, and provided better ranking of PA and sedentary time among women than NORDIET-FFQ. It is important to be aware of the limitations documented in the present study. The study is registered on the National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials (Identifier: NCT01570010). Registered 4 April 2012.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 25%
Student > Master 3 15%
Lecturer 2 10%
Professor 2 10%
Researcher 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 7 35%
Psychology 1 5%
Computer Science 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 8 40%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 June 2018.
All research outputs
#6,842,421
of 13,020,439 outputs
Outputs from BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation
#119
of 192 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#116,360
of 271,579 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,020,439 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 192 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.4. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 271,579 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.