Table 2.

Descriptions of included studies.

Country	First Author, Year	Research Design
		Participants	Data Collection	Measures
Bangkok (Thailand)	Sitthipornvorakul et al. 2014 [32]	320 office workers; aged 34.8 ± 6.2 years; 20% male	PA assessed by Yamax Digiwalker CW-700 pedometer for seven days and by GPAQ.	Concurrent validity: ICC for correlation between GPAQ and pedometer data.
Bangladesh	Mumu et al. 2017 [34]	162 healthy adults; aged 35 ± 9 years; 54% female	Seven-day wearing AG, then answered GPAQ in a face-to-face interview.	Concurrent validity: Spearman’s rho between GPAQ and accelerometer indicators.
Chile	Aguilar-Farias et al. 2017 [19]	217 adults; aged 43.77 ± 15.75 year; 42.9% male	Seven-day wearing AG; face-to-face interview GPAQ single question about sedentary behavior.	Concurrent validity (Spearman correlation) between AG and GPAQ.
China	Hu et al. 2015 [11]	205 adults; aged 30–70 years; 38.54% male	Completed three questionnaires twice (Day 1 and Day 9), a PA-log for seven days.	Test–retest reliabilities: Using intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC); Relative validities: Comparing the data from PA questionnaires and PA-log.
France	Rivière et al. 2018 [35]	92 adults (56.5% students; 43,5% staff in a medical school); age >18; 27.2% male	Seven-day wearing AG, complete GPAQ before and after wearing AG.	Reliability and criterion and concurrent validity of GPAQ against AG.
India	Misra et al. 2014 [36]	234 participants; age 15–74 years; 49.6% male	Test–retest repeatability of GPAQ, IPAQ, and pedometer.	Spearman’s rho, ICC for validity and reliability.
	Mathews et al. 2016 [45]	47 adults; aged 18–64 years; 100% female	Using AG to validate the self-polished modified GPAQ.	Concurrent validity (Spearman’s rho) and ICC
Korea	Lee et al. 2019 [46]	115 for reliability (55 males and 60 females), age 19–75 years; 199 adults for validity (82 males and 117 females)	Completed GPARQ twice with seven days apart; Seven-day wearing AG, complete GPAQ after wearing AG.	Test–retest reliability and criterion-related validity (Spearman’s rho)
Malaysia	Lingesh et al. 2016 [9]	43 nurses; aged 24 to 55 years (44.48 ± 8.38 years); 100% female	IPAQ and GPAQ: Measured on the eighth day, and wore SenseWear accelerometer and recorded PA logs for seven consecutive days.	PA data measured by PA logs for seven days; METs-min/week−1 was used; Pearson correlations and a Bland–Altman plot.
	Soo et al. 2015 [37]	100 adults; aged 20–58 years; 83% female	By comparing GPAQ-M with IPAQ-S and objectively measuring PA using a Yamax DigiWalker pedometer.	Two-week test–retest reliability: Using the Wilcoxon signed-rank analysis; concurrent validity: Spearman’s rho by comparing GPAQ-M data with IPAQ and objectively measured PA data.
Saudi Arabia	Alkahtani, 2016 [38]	62 college students; aged 19–21 years (20.0 ± 1.1 year); 100% male	Completed GPAQ twice (two weeks apart) and wore AG for seven consecutive days.	Test–retest reliability and concurrent validity of the GPAQ with AG using Spearman’s rho.
Singapore	Chu et al. 2015 [18]	110 working adults and students; aged 31 (26.8–47.3); 70.9% female	Self- and interviewer-administration of GPAQ, seven days of AG.	Test–retest reliability with one-week interval; criterion validity with Spearman’s ICC.
	Chu et al. 2018 [7]	84 medicine faculty and staff at a university; aged 21–65 years; 69% female	Single sitting item of GPAQ using self- and interviewer-administered modes twice with seven days apart, seven days of AG.	Reliability using the Spearman’s rho and ICC; Convergent validity using Spearman’s rho.
South Africa	Watson et al. 2017 [39]	95 pregnant women, aged 29.5 ± 5.7 years	Data collected at 14–18 weeks and 29–33 weeks’ gestation; seven-day wearing AG; comparing total time in MVPA between GPAQ and AG.	Content validity, convergent validity in comparison with AG; relative validity.
Spain	Ruiz-Casado et al. 2016 [40]	204 cancer survivors; aged 18–79 years; 36% male	Comparing IPAQ-SF and GPAQ with AG; AG was worn for 5 to 10 days.	Validity: Wilcoxon signed-rank was used to compare the differences between questionnaire and accelerometry data.
Switzerland	Wanner et al., 2017 [47]	354 (physical activity) and 366 (sitting), age 18–83 years	Completed GPAQ on Day 1, then wore AG for seven days.	Concurrent validity (Spearman correlation)
The United Arab Emirates (UAE)	Doyle et al. 2019 [48]	93 university students;	Completing GPAQ-A on two occasions (seven days apart); wearing an accelerometer for seven days.	Test–retest reliability and criterion validity
UK	Cleland et al. 2014 [16]	101 adults; aged 44 ± 14 years; 54% male	Wore AG for seven days and completed GPAQ on Day 7; Repeated for a random sub-sample at three to six months later.	Wilcoxon-signed rank tests for differences in measures; Spearman’s rho coefficient for criterion validity and extent of change.
US	Gorzelitz et al. 2018 [41]	347 adults; aged 50.7 ± 16.9 years; 46.7% male	Wore AG for seven days; GPAQ face-to-face interviews self-reported data.	MVPA data measured by both GPAQ and AG; MVPA converted into METs.
	Herrmann et al. 2013 [42]	Study 1: 69 adults; aged 43.1 ± 11.4 years; 82.6% female; Study 2: 16 adults; aged 40.2 ± 12.6 years; 50% female	First study for long-term test–retest reliability with three moths apart, completed GPAQ and worn ActiGraph GT1M accelerometer for seven days; Second study for short-term test–retest reliability with 10 days apart.	ICC for reliability; weighted Cohen’s K and percent agreement for testing validity with categorical scores (IPAQ vs. GPAQ); Spearman’s rho for validity with numerical variables.
	Hoos et al. 2012 [43]	72 Latinas; aged 43.01 ± 9.05 years; 58% female	Worn accelerometer for seven days at the baseline and six months later; GPAQ data collected at the same time.	GPAQ’s sensitivity to intervention change using Spearman’s rho for concurrent validity.
	Metcalf et al. 2018 [20]	108 residents; aged 49.4 years (range: 19.8–68.7); 68.5% female	Seven-day wearing AG followed by a telephone interview of GPAQ.	Multivariable linear regression models using functions of the GPAQ data to predict AG measured physical activity and sedentary behavior.
Vietnam	Thuy et al. 2010 [22]	251 adults; aged 25–64 years; 50.6% female	GPAQ and IPAQ were administered face-to-face, then wore a pedometer and complete PA log for seven consecutive days.	Reliability of GPAQ and IPAQ for groups; Concurrent validity was assessed from the correlations between pedometer steps per day and IPAQ.
	Trinh et al. 2009 [12]	169 adults; aged 25–64 years; 48.5% male	GPAQ was administered twice in the dry and wet season two weeks apart, respectively; wore the accelerometer twice for seven days during the week before the first and last GPAQ administration.	Spearman’s rho for the repeatability of the GPAQ, weighted Cohen’s Kappa for reliability; Spearman’s rho for the criterion validity of the GPAQ.
Bangladesh, Brazil, China, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Japan, Portugal, and South Africa	Bull et al. 2009 [1]	2657 adults from nine countries; aged 18–75 years; 61.3% male	Ten projects were initiated in 2002–2003 through WHO headquarters and regional offices and other known networks.	Test–retest reliability of GPAQ for categorical variables using Cohen’s Kappa and Spearman’s rho for continuous variables; Concurrent validity with IPAQ and pedometer/accelerometer data using Spearman’s rho.
Belgium, Spain, UK	Laeremans et al. 2017 [44]	122 adults; aged 35 ± 10 years; 45% males	Seven-day wearing SenseWear armband and complete GPAQ online on the final day; adjusted GPAQ to capture information on walking, cycling and e-biking trips separately for the travel to and from work subscale; three trials for the same data collection.	Reliability: The changes in the difference between two methods over three trials; energy expenditure and minutes spent in MVPA, MPA, VPA and sedentary behaviors; Validity: Wilcoxon signed rank-sum test, Spearman correlation coefficients, mixed-effects regression models and Bland–Altman plots.

Note: AG = accelerometer Actigraph GT3X; GPAQ = Global Physical Activity Questionnaire; GPAQ-A = Global Physical Activity Questionnaire-Arabic Version; ICC = intraclass correlation coefficient; IPAQ-SF = International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Short Form; LoA = limits of agreement; MVPA = moderate-to-vigorous physical activity; MPA = moderate physical activity; VPA = vigorous physical activity.