Hofmeister and Weisser comment on the results relating to the prevalence trend of physical inactivity and criticize the crude categorization, while using a simple question on exercise of at least one hour per week (1). As they rightly emphasize, Baecke’s validated questionnaire has become the standard instrument for epidemiological studies (2). One limitation of the SHIP-0 study is the fact that this questionnaire was incompletely included in SHIP-0, and only the variables used in our article allow comparability with SHIP-Trend-0. Both authors’ comments are therefore completely justified. In the studies subsequent to SHIP-0, Baecke’s questionnaire was completely integrated.
Footnotes
Conflict of interest statement
The authors of all contributions declare that no conflict of interest exists.
References
- 1.Völzke H, Ittermann T, Schmidt CO, et al. Prevalence trends in lifestyle-related risk factors—two cross-sectional analyses with a total of 8728 participants from the Study of Health in Pomerania from 1997 to 2001 and 2008 to 2012. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2015;112:185–192. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2015.0185. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Baecke JA, Burema J, Frijters JE. A short questionnaire for the measurement of habitual physical activity in epidemiological studies. Am J Clin Nutr. 1982;36:936–942. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/36.5.936. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]