Paper
Friday, July 13, 2007
The Children's Computerized Physical Activity Reporter-Initial Reliability and Validity Evaluation
Patricia Flannery Pearce, MPH, PhD, APRN-FNP, College of Nursing, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA, Justine J. Reel, PhD, NCC, Exercise & Sport Science, University of Utah, College of Health, Salt Lake City, UT, USA, and Jacquelyn Williamson, MS, Emma Eccles Jones Research Center, The University of Utah, College of Nursing, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
| Learning Objective #1: identify the importance of reliability and validity related to the Children’s Computerized Physical Activity Reporter for practice and research. |
| Learning Objective #2: identify at two issues related to the usability of self-report questionnaires for middle-school children. |
Background: Assessing children’s physical activity through informal questions or self-report tools in clinical practice and research requires use of developmentally-appropriate language that children readily understand to support their reporting. The Children’s Computerized Physical Activity Reporter (C-CPAR) is a computerized self-report physical activity questionnaire designed with children, based on a qualitative study exploring children’s understanding of physical activity and their reporting preferences and needs.
Purpose: To evaluate test-retest reliability, concurrent validity, and usability of the C-CPAR.
Methods: A convenience sample of 31 children (mean age=12, sd=1.3; Hispanic n=23, African-American n=3, and 1 each American Indian, Asian, Caucasian, Pacific Islander, other) enrolled in a sports camp with scheduled activities participated. Each child completed 24-hour activity recalls on two consecutive days while simultaneously wearing a pedometer.
Results: A strong correlation (r = 0.76, p=0.0002) was demonstrated between MET-minutes (activity duration x metabolic equivalent for the activity) from the 2-day reports. Comparing scheduled and reported activities, there were no significant differences between number of activities reported (m=5.38 day1, 5.27 day2; t= 0.29), minutes in activity (m=240 day 1, 263 day2, t= -.129), and total MET-minutes (m=954, day1, 958 day2, t=-0.3). Significant correlations (r=0.66, p<.01 Day 1; r=0.37, p<.01 Day 2) between average metabolic equivalents for scheduled activities (m=4.19) and C-CPAR-reported activities were demonstrated. Activity reports with pedometer counts comparisons were non-significant (r=0.33). Usability issues included language difficulties and computer inexperience, but with attention from research team personnel, those children had no difficulty completing the questionnaire.
Implications: Adequate reliability and concurrent validity were demonstrated in a small, ethnically diverse sample. Participants had little difficulty using the C-CPAR, but a Spanish language option would be useful. Potentially the C-CPAR may be useful as a screening questionnaire for clinical practice, or in research. Developmentally-appropriate measurement tools may facilitate measurement techniques upon which appropriate interventions can be based.