These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: The validity of the Stanford Seven-Day Physical Activity Recall in young adults.
    Author: Washburn RA, Jacobsen DJ, Sonko BJ, Hill JO, Donnelly JE.
    Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc; 2003 Aug; 35(8):1374-80. PubMed ID: 12900693.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To evaluate the criterion validity of the 7-Day Physical Activity Recall (7D-PAR) and factors associated with reporting error, in a sample of moderately overweight, young adult men and women. METHODS: Average total daily energy expenditure (TDEE) and physical activity energy expenditure (PAEE) from the 7D-PAR were compared with the same parameters assessed by doubly labeled water in 17 men, age = 23.9 +/- 3.8 yr, and 29 women, age = 23.3 +/- 4.6 yr, who volunteered to participate in a 16-month supervised aerobic exercise trial. PAEE was estimated from the 7D-PAR and from DLW [0.9 * TDEE -resting metabolic rate (RMR) (indirect calorimetry)]. In addition, peak oxygen uptake and percent body fat were obtained. RESULTS: No significant differences in TDEE (kJ.d-1) were noted between the 7D-PAR (11825 +/- 1779) and DLW (11922 +/- 2516) for the complete sample (N = 46) or for men (7D-PAR = 13198 +/- 1638, DLW = 13885 +/- 2754) or women (7D-PAR = 11018 +/- 1323, DLW = 10771 +/- 1457. The mean PAEE from the 7D-PAR was not different from DLW in the total sample (7D-PAR = 3286 +/- 502, DLW = 3508 +/- 1863) as well as in men (7D-PAR = 3650 +/- 490, DLW = 3989 +/- 2461) and women (3073 +/- 377, DLW = 3223 +/- 1360). In a regression model, PAEE, peak oxygen uptake, gender and percent fat accounted for 86% of the reporting error in total daily energy expenditure when using the 7D-PAR. CONCLUSION: The 7D-PAR provided a reasonable estimate of both the mean TDEE and PAEE in this sample; however, estimates of energy expenditure on an individual basis using the PAR were subject to considerable error.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]