Skip to main content

Table 1 Survey sampling procedures and response details from 20 countries; International Prevalence Study, 2002–2004.

From: The International Prevalence Study on Physical Activity: results from 20 countries

Country

Sampling Procedures

IPAQ Short Form Administration

Month Year

Response Rate

Sample Size 18–65 yrs

% male

% education> 13 years

Argentina

A representative sample of Buenos Aires – Multistage stratified random selection of houses/apartments and blocks

Self

Jun 2003

72%

1203

44.9

46.6

Australia

A nationally representative sample – RDD with simple random sample of households

Telephone

Apr 2003

55%

2691

44.0

48.8

Belgium

A representative sample of Flanders – Random selection of municipalities/cities and inhabitants within municipality/city

Self

Mar–May, Sept–Oct 2003

28%

1969

51.9

45.1

Brazil

State of Sao Paulo representative sample – Simple random sample proportional to size

Interviewer

Mar–May 2003

85%

991

48.5

N/A

Canada

A nationally representative sample – RDD sample proportional to number of households in each province

Telephone

Sept–Nov 02 – Mar–May 03

51%

2669

45.3

62.3

China (Shanghai)

A representative sample of Shanghai – Multistage sampling of 3 communities, 5 neighborhoods within communities, and adults within households

Interviewer

Nov–Dec 2002

84%

1593

51.5

32.5

Colombia

A representative sample of Bogota DC – Multistage unequal probability selection proportional to size

Interviewer

Mar–May 2003

84%

3000

40.4

19.1

Czech Republic

9 academic worksites in 10 regions; a nationally representative sample – Simple random sample proportional to size. Students distributed questionnaires to permanent/temporary residences, partly randomly selected

Self

Nov 2002

May 2003

58%

7513

48.2

42.2

Hong Kong SAR, China

A nationally representative sample – Stratified by district

Interviewer

Oct–Dec 02 – Jan–Feb 03

48%

4886

48.9

14.1

India

Convenience sample of employees and their families from 2 worksite populations in Ghaziabad and Nagpur

Interviewer

Jan–Dec 2003

88%

1005

48.7

38.2

Japan

22 universities and 6 worksites from different regions of Japan, representing nearly all areas

Self

July 2003

90%

4959

38.4

29.2

Lithuania

A systematic random sample from 10 rural districts and the 5 largest Lithuanian cities – Respondents sampled at fixed intervals after random selection of a starting point

Interviewer

Apr–May 2003

77%

2227

41.4

58.0

New Zealand

A nationally representative sample – Simple random sample proportional to size

Telephone

Mar–Apr 2003

42%

1495

40.8

36.9

Norway

A nationally representative sample – Simple random sampling

Self

Oct 2003

41.3%

1645

47.3

45.8

Portugal

A nationally representative sample – Simple random sample proportional to size

Self

Apr–May 2002

>80%

1525

47.3

3.1

Saudi Arabia

A representative sample of Riyadh City – Simple random sample of telephone-equipped households

Telephone

Mar–May 2003

66%

988

65.4

38.3

Spain

A representative sample of Catalonia – Simple random sample proportional to size

Self

Oct–Nov 2002

62.4%

1580

44.9

43.5

Sweden

A nationally representative sample – Simple random sampling

Self

Oct–Dec 2002

59%

1290

45.9

30.8

Taiwan

A nationally representative sample – RDD sample proportional to number of households, in 7 stratified areas

Telephone

Sept–Nov 2004

48.3%

4846

47.6

40.8

USA

A nationally representative sample – Simple random sample proportional to size

Telephone

Sept–Nov 2002

30.9%

4671

42.8

61.4

  1. Note: RDD = Random Digit Dial; CATI = computer-assisted telephone interview