Skip to main content

Table 4 Methodological quality and measurement properties of studies on validity

From: Systematic review on measurement properties of questionnaires assessing the neighbourhood environment in the context of youth physical activity behaviour

Source Dimensions of environmental construct (number of items) Structural validity Convergent validitya
   Results MQS Results
Dunton et al. [37] availability of community exercise facilities (26) not assessed 57 reported PA indicators (lifestyle activities, vigorous PA, energy expenditure): n.s.
Durant et al. [38] 1. environmental barriers to PA in local parks (5) PCA: Support for a two factor solution 43 related to reported PA in parks (SR of adol and PR of adol)
2. safety barriers to PA in local parks (6) related to reported PA in parks (PR of adol)
3. environmental barriers to PA in neighbourhood streets (5) PCA: Support for a two factor solution related to reported PA in streets (all administrator groups)
4. safety barriers to PA in neighbourhood streets (5) related to reported PA in streets (PR of chn)
Evenson et al. [40] 1. safety (8) not assessed   safe walk/ jog related to PA, seen by others related to ATS
2. aesthetics (4) 43 trees, things to look at, garbage related to PA, smells related to ATS
3. facilities near the home (31)   equipment, trails, number of facilities near home related to PA, number of facilities near home related to ATS
Forman et al. [41] 1. environmental barriers for walking and cycling to parks (17) PCA: Support for a three factor solution (environment, planning/ psychosocial, safety) 29 subscales environment and planning/ psychosocial related to reported walking or bicycling to the specific destination (except for planning/ psychosocial in PR of chn)
2. environmental barriers for walking and cycling to shops (17) PCA: Support for a three factor solution (environment, planning/ psychosocial, safety) all subscales related to reported walking or bicycling to the specific destination (safety only in PR of chn)
3. environmental barriers for walking and cycling to school (17) PCA: Support for a three factor solution (environment, planning/ psychosocial, safety) all subscales related to reported walking or bicycling to the specific destination (safety only in PR of adol)
Huang et al. [46] 1.safety (5) EFA: Support for an one factor solution   not assessed
2. sports facilities (5) not assessed   not assessed
McMinn et al. [35] local environment (8) PCA: Support for a two factor solution   not assessed
Ommundsen et al. [43] 1. opportunity (3) EFA and CFA: Support for a three factor solution 71 related to reported stages of PA change: F(4, 3689) = 29.43**; low objective measured PA vs. high PA associated with lower opportunity scores: (M = 2.60 vs. 2.65; t = 2.10*)
2. facility (2) related to reported stages of PA change: F(4, 3689) = 3.60**; low objective measured PA vs. high PA associated with higher facility scores: (M = 1.47 vs. 1.30; t = -2.33*)
3. licenceb (2)  
Pirasteh et al. [47] environment (4) PCA: Support for an one factor solution   not assessed
Rosenberg et al. [36] 1. land use mix-diversity (20) not assessed 57 related to reported walking to shops and to school in different administrator groups
2. pedestrian and automobile traffic safety (7) related to reported being active in parks and walking to parks in different administrator groups
3. crime safety (6) related to reported walking to shops (PR of chn, SR of adol) and being active in streets (PR of chn)
4. aesthetics (3) related to reported being active in parks (PR of chn), walking to parks (SR of a) and being physically active (PR of adol)
5. walking/ cycling facilities (3) related to reported being active in parks and walking to shops, school and parks (different administrator groups)
6. street connectivity (3) related to reported being active in parks and walking to shops, school and parks (different administrator groups)
7. land use mix-access (6) related to reported being active in parks and walking to shops, school and parks (different administrator groups)
8. residential density (4) related to reported being active in parks and walking to school (PR of chn, SR of adol)
  9. recreation facilities (14)    related to reported being active in parks and streets and walking to shops, school and parks (different administrator groups)
  1. Note: * Significant at 0.05; ** Significant at 0.001; PA, physical activity; MVPA, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity; EFA, exploratory factor analysis; PCA, principle components analysis; CFA, confirmatory factor analysis; n.s., not significant; SR, self-report; PR, parent-report; adol, adolescents; chn, children; ATS, active transport to school; a due to the aim of this review article only relationships with physical activity behaviours were stated; b dimension is not an aspect of a neighbourhood environmental construct in the proper sense, but was mentioned, because it was included in factorial analysis.