In summary, we found this self-administered PA questionnaire to be moderately reproducible while the validity compared to an accelerometer was poor.
It displays good internal and external validity compared to other validated, self-rated scales of work performance and productivity.
The psychometric evaluation of the clinical examination showed an excellent interrater reliability and a high concurrent validity compared to the Cobb angle.
Schmitz et al. described a high reliability (internal consistency of somatization subscale α = 0.81) and a moderate concurrent validity compared to the "General Health Questionnaire" (0.52) [ 32].
The mini-SPIN-R evidenced superior convergent validity compared to the mini-SPIN and both measures had similar divergent validity.
The TLFB demonstrates acceptable convergent and discriminant validity compared to other substance abuse measures (Fals-Stewart et al. 2000).
Assessment during natural movements using 3D motion analysis has by definition higher external validity compared to static assessment, both due to the movement itself, and to the subject being able to activate thee knee joint muscles in a natural way.
Accelerometer-measured PA is considered to have superior validity compared to self-reported information [ 23].
The REALM has high criterion-related validity compared to longer literacy measures [ 24, 25].
One study showed that the PAR had superior validity compared to the International Physical Activity Questionnaire IPAQQ) [ 13].
