When there is a high test-retest correlation for the construct being measured what can be concluded?

  1. World Health Organization: Diet, nutrition, and prevention of chronic diseases, Joint WHO/FAO Expert Consultation, Geneva, 28 Jan - 1 Feb 2002. WHO technical report series 916. 2003, Geneva, Switzerland

    Google Scholar 

  2. Wendel-Vos GC, Schuit AJ, Saris WH, Kromhout D: Reproducibility and relative validity of the short questionnaire to assess health-enhancing physical activity. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003, 56: 1163-1169. 10.1016/S0895-4356(03)00220-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Kohl HW, Fulton JE, Caspersen CJ: Assessment of physical activity among children and adolescents: A review and synthesis. Preventive Medicine. 2000, 31: S54-S76. 10.1006/pmed.1999.0542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Mcmurray RG, Ring KB, Treuth MS, Welk GJ, Pate RR, Schmitz KH, et al: Comparison of two approaches to structured physical activity surveys for adolescents. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2004, 36: 2135-2143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Lubans DR, Hesketh K, Cliff DP, Barnett LM, Salmon J, Dollman J, et al: A systematic review of the validity and reliability of sedentary behaviour measures used with children and adolescents. Obes Rev. 2011, 12: 781-799. 10.1111/j.1467-789X.2011.00896.x.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Chinapaw MJ, Mokkink LB, Van Poppel MN, van Mechelen W, Terwee CB: Physical activity questionnaires for youth: a systematic review of measurement properties. Sports Med. 2010, 40: 539-563. 10.2165/11530770-000000000-00000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Collins CE, Watson J, Burrows T: Measuring dietary intake in children and adolescents in the context of overweight and obesity. Int J Obes (Lond). 2010, 34: 1103-1115. 10.1038/ijo.2009.241.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Tourangeau R, Rips LJ, Rasinski K: The Psychology of Survey Response. 2000, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. Brown H, Hume C, Chinapaw M: Validity and reliability of instruments to assess potential mediators of children's physical activity: A systematic review. J Sci Med Sport. 2009, 12: 539-548. 10.1016/j.jsams.2009.01.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Brug J, Te Velde SJ, Chinapaw MJ, Bere E, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Moore H, et al: Evidence-based development of school-based and family-involved prevention of overweight across Europe: the ENERGY-project's design and conceptual framework. BMC Public Health. 2010, 10: 276-10.1186/1471-2458-10-276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. van Stralen MM, Te Velde SJ, Singh AS, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Martens MK, van der Sluijs M, et al: EuropeaN Energy balance Research to prevent excessive weight Gain among Youth (ENERGY) project: Design and methodology of the ENERGY cross-sectional survey. BMC Public Health. 2011, 11: 65-10.1186/1471-2458-11-65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. van der Horst K, Oenema A, van de Looij-Jansen , Brug J: The ENDORSE study: research into environmental determinants of obesity related behaviors in Rotterdam schoolchildren. BMC Public Health. 2008, 8: 142-10.1186/1471-2458-8-142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Singh AS, Chin A Paw JM, Kremers SP, Visscher TL, Brug J, Van Mechelen W: Design of the Dutch Obesity Intervention in Teenagers (NRG-DOiT): Systematic development, implementation and evaluation of a school-based intervention aimed at the prevention of excessive weight gain in adolescents. BMC Public Health. 2006, 6: 304-10.1186/1471-2458-6-304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. De Bourdeaudhuij I, Klepp KI, Due P, Rodrigo CP, de Alemeida M, Wind M, et al: Reliability and validity of a questionnaire to measure personal, social and environmental correlates of fruit and vegetable intake in 10-11-year-old children in five European countries. Public Health Nutr. 2005, 8: 189-200.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Landis JR, Koch GG: The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977, 33: 159-174. 10.2307/2529310.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Mcgraw KO, Wong SP: Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods. 1996, 1: 30-46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH: Psychometric theory. 1994, New York: McGraw-Hill, 3

    Google Scholar 

  18. Saelens BE, Frank LD, Auffrey C, Whitaker RC, Burdette HL, Colabianchi N: Measuring Physical Environments of Parks and Playgrounds: EAPRS Instrument Development and Inter-Rater Reliability. Journal of Physical Activity and Health. 2006, 3: S190-S207.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Verplanken B, Orbell S: Reflections on past behavior: A self-report index of habit strength. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 2003, 33: 1313-1330. 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2003.tb01951.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Vereecken CA, Maes L: A Belgian study on the reliability and relative validity of the Health Behaviour in School-Aged Children food-frequency questionnaire. Public Health Nutrition. 2003, 6: 581-588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Booth ML, Okely AD, Chey T, Bauman A: The reliability and validity of the physical activity questions in the WHO health behaviour in schoolchildren (HBSC) survey: a population study. British Journal of Sports Medicine. 2001, 35: 263-267. 10.1136/bjsm.35.4.263.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Wilson AM, Magarey AM, Mastersson N: Reliability and relative validity of a child nutrition questionnaire to simultaneously assess dietary patterns associated with positive energy balance and food behaviours, attitudes, knowledge and environments associated with healthy eating. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2008, 5: 5-10.1186/1479-5868-5-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. McMinn AM, Van Sluijs EM, Harvey NC, Cooper C, Inskip HM, Godfrey KM, et al: Validation of a maternal questionnaire on correlates of physical activity in preschool children. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2009, 6: 81-10.1186/1479-5868-6-81.

    Article  Google Scholar 


Page 2

  Belgium Greece Hungary Netherlands Norway Spain
TEST-RETEST RELIABILITY STUDY*       
No. in reliability study 118 155 132 137 102 86
Age, years (mean (sd)) 11.4 (.6) 11.6 (.6) 12.5 (.6) 11.8 (.7) 11.4 (.6) 11.3 (.5)
Male gender (%) 44 52 50 53 42 44
Native language at home       
   Native 116 151 128 130 92 76
   Non-native 2 4 1 7 10 9
Family status       
   Traditional (mother and father) 99 125 88 104 85 71
   Non-traditional 19 28 44 33 15 14
CONSTRUCT VALIDITY STUDY**       
No. in validity study 15 16 15 20 15 15
Age, years (mean (sd)) 11.4 (.6) 11.5 (.6) 12.0 (.6) 11.7 (.7) 11.6 (.8) 11.6 (.8)
Male gender (%) 33 69 40 50 53 47
Native language at home       
   Native 13 16 15 20 13 15
   Non-native 1 0 0 0 2 0
Family status       
   Traditional (mother and father) 12 14 11 13 10 13
   Non-traditional 3 2 4 7 5 2

  1. * Missing data test-retest reliability study: native language at home: n = 4 (Hungary: n = 3; Spain: n = 1); family status n = 3 (Norway: n = 2; Spain: n = 1)
  2. ** Missing data construct validity study: native language at home: n = 1 (Belgium: n = 1)