Skip to main content
. 2021 Jan 18;11(1):e046636. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046636

Table 5.

Survey measures in International Physical Activity and Environment Study of Adolescents (IPEN Adolescent): description/sample items, response options, subscale scoring and psychometric properties129–148

Variable Reference Description/sample items Number of items; response options Subscale scores used in analyses Psychometric properties (reference)
Built environment
Adolescent survey
Perceived neighbourhood built environment NEWS-Y-IPEN; adapted from Rosenberg et al, 2009129 Neighbourhood traffic safety (8 items; eg, so much traffic makes it unpleasant for child to walk in neighbourhood).
Neighbourhood crime safety (6 items; eg, high crime rate, unsafe to go on walks at night).		 14 items total: 8 items (traffic) and 6 items (crime);
1=strongly disagree, 2=somewhat disagree, 3=somewhat agree,
4=strongly agree		 Subscales (11 items retained):
Traffic safety: mean of 3 items; 2 reverse coded items
Pedestrian infrastructure and safety: mean of 4 items, all reverse coded
Safety from crime: mean of 4 items, all reverse coded		 Test–retest intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs)=0.67 and 0.73, respectively (Rosenberg et al, 2009129)
Evidence of construct validity with all subscales (Cerin et al, 201929)
Parent survey*
Perceived neighbourhood built environment NEWS-Y-IPEN; adapted from Rosenberg et al, 2009129 Neighbourhood traffic safety (8 items; eg, so much traffic makes it unpleasant for child to walk in neighbourhood).
Neighbourhood crime safety (6 items; eg, high crime rate, unsafe to go on walks at night).
Street connectivity (3 items; eg, many different routes for getting from place to place in neighbourhood).
Walking infrastructure (3 items; eg, sidewalks on most streets, grass/dirt between streets and sidewalks).
Neighbourhood aesthetics (4 items; for example, trees along streets, beautiful natural things for child to look at in neighbourhood).
Land use mix access (6 items; eg, stores within easy walking distance of home, parking difficult in shopping areas).
Land use mix diversity (27 items; eg, how long would it take to walk to various destinations such as supermarket, bus, subway or train stop, small public park).
Residential density (6 items; for example, detached single family residences, multifamily houses 4–6 stories).		 63 items total;
30 items (traffic, crime, connectivity, infrastructure, aesthetics, access);
1=strongly disagree, 2=somewhat disagree, 3=somewhat agree, 4=strongly agree
27 items (land use mix diversity);
1=1–5 min, 2=6–10 min, 3=11–20 min, 4=21–30 min, 5=31+ min or don’t know)
6 items (residential density);
1=none, 2=a few, 3=some, 4=most, 5=all		 Subscales (46 items retained):
Residential density mean of 6 weighted items; weighting=0, 11, 25, 50, 75 and 100 for items 1–6.
Land use mix diversity: mean of 13 items
Recreational facilities: mean of 9 items
Accessibility and walking facilities: mean of 5 items; 1 reverse coded item
Traffic safety: mean of 3 items; 2 reverse coded items
Pedestrian infrastructure and safety: mean of 3 items
Safety from crime: mean of 4 items, all reverse coded
Aesthetics: mean of 3 items		 Test–retest ICCs range 0.61–0.78 (Rosenberg et al, 2009129)
Evidence of construct validity with all subscales (Cerin et al., 201929)
Physical activity (PA)
Adolescent survey
Active transport, to/from school Adapted from Centers for Disease Control Kids-Walk-to-School programme (CDC, 2000130) Number of days travelling both to and from school by walking, bicycling or skateboarding in an average school week. Also asked how long it takes to walk to school. 10 items;
To school (5 items) and from school (5 items): Scored 0–5 days.
1 item (# min to walk to school);
1=1–5 min, 2=6–10 min, 3=11–20 min, 4=21–30 min, 5=31+ min.		 Total number of active trips per week to and from school were summed (range=0–10 trips). Test–retest ICCs ranged from 0.51 to 0.92, and % agreement from 73% to 100% (Timperio et al., 2006131; Joe et al., 2012132; Cerin et al, 201496)
PA at school (PE classes) ActiveWhere, 2005133 Number of days per week of PE class, and average length of PE period. 2 items;
Scored 0–5 days and open-ended response for # minutes per PE period		 Number of days multiplied by length of PE period to represent total time spent in PE during a school week Test–retest ICCs were from 0.76 to 1.00 and 0.86 to 0.89, respectively.
(Joe et al., 2012132; Cerin et al, 201496)
Sports and PA classes, at school and outside of school Adapted from item developed by TEAN investigators Number of sports teams or physical activity classes (excluding PE) participated in (a) at school and (b) outside of school 2 items;
0=0,
1=1,
2=2,
3=3,
4=4 or more.		 Number of teams/classes used as continuous variable. Test–retest of original item, ICC=0.65 (Joe et al., 2012132). Test–retest ICCs for at school and outside school activities 0.74 and 0.89, respectively (Cerin et al, 201496)
Total PA, outside of school Prochaska et al, 2001134 Number of days per week being physically active for at least 60 min outside of PE or gym class (a) during the past 7 days and (b) during a typical week. 2 items;
scored 0–7 days		 Mean of 2 items to represent average days meeting PA guidelines (60+ min/day) Test–retest ICC=0.77 and criterion validity r=0.40 (Prochaska et al., 2001134). Test–retest ICCs during past 7 days and during a typical week 0.70 and 0.79, respectively (Cerin et al, 201496)
Active transport, non-school
(preferred)		 Adapted from SMARTRAQ Frank et al, 2001135 Typical frequency of walking or bicycling to/from nine locations (eg, recreation facility, friend’s house, park, food outlet). 9 items;
0=never,
1=≤once/month, 2=once every other week, 3=once/week,
4=2–3 times/week,
5=4+ times/week.		 Mean of 9 items to represent average frequency of active transportation Test–retest ICCs ranging from 0.47 to 0.82 and % agreement from 57% to 100% (Cerin et al, 201496)
PA in or near home
(preferred)		 Sallis et al., 1993,136 ActiveWhere, 2005133 Typical frequency of being physically active in seven common settings in or near home (eg, home, nearby street, local park) 7 items;
0=never,
1=≤once/month, 2=once every other week, 3=once/week,
4=2–3 times/week,
5=4+ times/week.		 Mean of 7 items to represent the average frequency of being physically active in our near home. Test–retest ICCs ranged from 0.31 to 0.82 (Joe et al., 2012132; Cerin et al, 201496) and % agreement from 57% to 100% (Cerin et al., 201496).
PA in neighbourhood
(preferred)		 ActiveWhere, 2005133 Typical frequency of being physically active in 15 common settings outside of the neighbourhood (eg, recreation centre, fields/courts, open space). 15 items;
0=never,
1=≤once/ month, 2=once every other week, 3=once/ week,
4=2–3 times/week,
5=4+ times/week.		 Mean of 15 items to represent the average frequency of being physically active outside of the neighbourhood. Test–retest ICCs ranged from 0.39 to 0.66 (Joe et al., 2012132).
Dog walking
(preferred)		 Bauman et al, 2001137 Dog ownership and number of days walking and playing outside with their dog in the last week 3 items;
Dog ownership:
1=yes
0=no
Number of days (if yes to above):
Scored 0–7 days		 Number of days used as continuous variable for:

  1. walking dog

  2. playing with dog

 Test–retest Kappa=0.93 (dog ownership). (Joe et al., 2012132).
PA at school (recess)
(preferred)		 ActiveWhere, 2005133 Frequency and duration of recess periods during a school week. Number of days, number of recess periods per day, and length of time per recess period. 3 items;
Scored 0–5 days, open-ended for # recess periods per day, and open-ended for # minutes per recess period		 Number of days multiplied by # of recess periods and length of average recess period to represent total time spent in recess during a school week Test–retest % agreement for number of days=94% and ICC=0.69 for minutes per recess period (Cerin et al., 201496).
Parent survey
Parents’ transport walking, leisure PA, and work PA
(preferred)		 Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ);
Bull et al, 2009138 		Typical frequency and duration of

  1. walking or biking for transport

  2. moderate and vigorous PA for leisure

  3. moderate and vigorous PA during work

 15 items;
Categorical (yes/no) for each intensity/ domain.
Open-ended # days per typical week and amount of time per typical day for each intensity within each domain of PA.		 Number of days per week multiplied by # min/day for each intensity (mod +vig= MVPA) within each domain to create minutes per week of

  1. walking/biking for transport

  2. minutes of MVPA for leisure

  3. minutes of MVPA for work.

 Test–retest Kappa (categorical yes/no) ranged from 0.67 to 0.73.
Test–retest Spearman’s rho for continuous variables ranged 0.67–0.81.
Concurrent validity with International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ), Spearman’s rho ranged 0.45–0.57
(Bull et al, 2009138)
Sedentary time
Adolescent survey
Time in sedentary behaviours Marshall et al., 2002139; Rosenberg et al, 2010140 Time spent in 6 sedentary activities on a typical school day (non-school hours). For example, watching TV/DVDs/videos, playing sedentary video games, riding in motor vehicle 6 items;
0=None
1=15 min, 2=30 min
3=1 hour, 4=2 hours, 5=3 hours, 6=4+ hours		 Responses recoded to minutes and summed to create min/day engaged in sedentary behaviours Test–retest ICCs ranged 0.51–0.90, construct validity was good (Rosenberg et al., 2010140; Cerin et al., 201496).
Parent survey
Parents’ total sitting
(preferred)		 GPAQ; Bull et al, 2009138 Duration of sitting or reclining per typical day 1 item; open-ended response for # minutes per day Number of minutes per day used as continuous variable. Test–retest Kappa=0.68
Concurrent validity with IPAQ, Spearman’s rho=0.65
(Bull et al, 2009138)
Parents’ time in sedentary behaviours Rosenberg et al, 2010140 Time spent in 7 sedentary activities on a typical weekday (non-work hours). For example, watching TV, using internet, riding in motor vehicle 7 items;
0=None
1=15 min, 2=30 min
3=1 hour, 4=2 hours, 5=3 hours, 6=4+ hours		 Responses recoded to minutes and summed to create min/day engaged in sedentary behaviours Test–retest ICCs ranged 0.64–0.90 and good construct validity (Rosenberg et al., 2010140).
Psychosocial
Adolescent survey
Benefits and barriers for PA Norman et al, 2005141 Agreement with statements representing barriers and benefits to doing physical activity. 10 items;
1=strongly disagree, 2=somewhat disagree, 3=somewhat agree, 4=strongly agree		 To be determined Test–retest ICCs ranged from 0.68 to 0.86 (Norman et al., 2005141; Cerin et al, 201797)
Self-efficacy for PA Norman et al, 2005141 Confidence to do physical activity in 6 situations (eg, when have a lot of homework, when feeling sad or stressed) 6 items;
1=I’m sure I can’t to
5=I’m sure I can		 Mean of 6 items to represent self efficacy to do physical activity Test–retest ICCs for scale=0.71 and.73 (Norman et al., 2005141; Cerin et al, 201797)
Enjoyment of PA Norman et al, 2005141 Enjoyment of physical activity 1 item;
1=strongly disagree, 2=somewhat disagree,
3=neutral,
4=somewhat agree, 5=strongly agree		 Single item indicator of enjoyment of PA Test–retest ICCs=0.43 and 0.65 (Norman et al., 2005141; Cerin et al, 201797)
Social support for PA Adapted from Amherst Health & Activity Study; Sallis et al, 2002142 Social support such as encouragement, participation and transportation provided by adults in household (3 items) and siblings/friends (2 items). 5 items;
0=never, 1=rarely, 2=sometimes, 3=often, 4=very often		 To be determined Internal consistency alpha=0.75 (Sallis et al., 2002142; alpha for social support by adults=0.68 and by friends=0.69 (Cerin et al., 201797). Test–retest ICCs for social support by adults=0.79 and by siblings/friends=0.74 (Cerin et al, 201797)
Rules for PA
(preferred)		 ActiveWhere, 2005133 Presence of parental rules related to physical activity (eg, stay in neighbourhood, do not go places alone, do not ride bike on street) 14 items;
1=yes, 0=no		 Sum of 14 items to represent number of rules related to being physically active. Test–retest ICCs ranged from 0.1 to 0.71 (Joe et al., 2012132). Test–retest ICC for total score=0.75 (Cerin et al., 201797)
Pros and cons to reducing sedentary time
(preferred)		 Norman et al, 2004143 Agreement with statements representing pros and cons to spending time in sedentary activities. 12 items;
1=strongly disagree, 2=somewhat disagree, 3=somewhat agree, 4=strongly agree		 To be determined Test–retest ICCs ranged from 0.66 to 0.86 (Norman et al., 2004143; Cerin et al, 201797)
Self-efficacy to reduce sedentary time
(preferred)		 Norman et al, 2005141 Confidence to be able to reduce sedentary time in 7 situations (eg, turn off TV when a programme is on you enjoy, set limits on how long to talk on telephone or text with friends) 7 items;
1=I’m sure I can’t to
5=I’m sure I can		 Mean of 7 items to represent self-efficacy to reduce sedentary time Test–retest ICC for scale=0.80 (Norman et al, 2005141) and 0.59 (Cerin et al, 201797)
Enjoyment of sedentary time
(preferred)		 Norman et al, 2005141 Enjoyment of sedentary time 1 item;
1=strongly disagree, 2=somewhat disagree,
3=neutral,
4=somewhat agree, 5=strongly agree		 Single item indicator of enjoyment of being sedentary Test–retest ICC=0.72 (Salmon et al, 2003144) and 0.77 (Cerin et al, 201797)
Sedentary time with others
(preferred)		 TEAN investigators Frequency of time spent in sedentary activities such as watching TV or playing electronic games with (a) brother/sisters, (b) parent/guardian/caregiver, and (c) friends 3 items;
0=never, 1=1–2 days, 2=3–4 days, 3=5–6 days, 4=every hour		 To be determined Test–retest ICC for sedentary time with adults=0.68 and with friends/siblings=0.72 (Cerin et al., 201797).
Rules for sedentary time
(preferred)		 Salmon et al, 2005145 Presence of parental rules related to sedentary activities (eg, no TV/computer before homework, no internet without permission) 3 items;
1=yes, 0=no		 Sum of 3 items to represent number of rules related to sedentary activities. Test–retest ICCs ranged from 0.5 to 0.53 (Joe et al., 2012132). Test–-retest ICC for scale=0.80 (Cerin et al., 201797).
Other environmental measures
Adolescent survey
Home electronics environment Adapted from ActiveWhere, 2005133

  1. electronic devices in the bedroom (eg, TV, computer)

  2. personal electronics (eg, cell phone, video game player)

 6 items (bedroom);
1=yes, 0=no
4 items (personal);
1=yes, 0=no		 Sum of 6 items to represent electronic device availability in the bedroom.
Sum of 4 items to represent portable personal electronic device availability.		 Test–retest ICCs ranged from 0.38 to 0.87 (Rosenberg et al, 2010146). Test–retest ICCs for devices in bedroom=0.96 and personal electronics=0.78 (Cerin et al, 201797)
Home workout equipment ActiveWhere, 2005133; adapted from Sallis et al, 1997147 Frequency of use of workout equipment in the home (eg, bike, basketball hoop, swimming pool) 10 items;
0=not available/do n’t have, 1=available but never use, 2=once a month or less; 3=once every other week; 4=once a week or more.		 Mean of 10 items to represent average frequency of use of workout equipment in the home. Test–retest ICCs ranged from 0.49 to 0.75 (Joe et al, 2012132) and ICC for scale=0.89 (Sallis et al, 1997147) and 0.98 (Cerin et al, 201797)
Public transport TEAN investigators

  1. number of days using public transportation (not school commuting)

  2. distance travelled away from home without parents by walking, biking and public transit

 1 item;
Scored 0–7 days
3 items; open-ended for # min from home one way		 Number of days/week used as continuous variable.
Number of minutes summed for 3 items.		 None
Barriers to active school transport ActiveWhere, 2005133 Difficulty of walking or biking to school due to various factors (eg, no sidewalks, too much stuff to carry, too much traffic). 17 items;
1=strongly disagree, 2=somewhat disagree, 3=somewhat agree, 4=strongly agree		 Mean of 17 items to represent barriers to active school transport Test–retest ICCs ranged from 0.38 to 0.77 (Joe et al, 2012132) Test–retest ICC for scale=0.76 and internal consistency alpha=0.91 (Cerin et al., 201797)
Barriers to neighbourhood PA
(preferred)		 ActiveWhere, 2005133 Difficulty of being active in local parks or streets/neighbourhood due to various factors (eg, no equipment, not safe because of traffic, doesn’t have good lighting) 9 items;
1=strongly disagree, 2=somewhat disagree, 3=somewhat agree, 4=strongly agree		 Mean of 9 items to represent barriers to being active in local parks and streets near home Test–retest ICCs ranged from 0.35 to 0.71 (Joe et al, 2012132). Test–retest ICC for scale=0.67 and internal consistency alpha=0.83 (Cerin et al., 201797).
After school activity environment
(preferred)		 ActiveWhere 2005133; Durant et al, 2009148 Frequency of supervised physical activities at school and access to play areas and fields after school. 2 items;
0=never, 1=rarely, 2=sometimes, 3=frequently, 4=always		 Mean of 2 items to represent a supportive after school PA environment Test–retest ICCs were 0.27 and 0.57, respectively (Joe et al., 2012132) and for the composite 2-item measure 0.70 (Cerin et al, 201797)

*Adolescents reported on these NEWS items in New Zealand.

MVPA, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity; NEWS-Y, Neighborhood Environment Walkability Scale for Youth; PA, physical activity; TEAN, Teen Environment and Neighborhood Study.