May 16, 20268 min readSanoLabs Editorial

How to Measure Your Weekly Physical Activity with the IPAQ Questionnaire

The IPAQ-SF is a validated 7-question self-report tool that classifies your weekly physical activity as low, moderate, or high — giving you a reproducible baseline to track whether your activity level is genuinely changing over time.

physical-activityipaqexercisequestionnairesself-trackingbehavioral-protocols

On this page

The IPAQ-SF is a validated 7-question self-report questionnaire that asks how much time you spent walking, doing moderate activity, and doing vigorous activity in the past seven days. Your responses are converted into a single weekly MET-minute total and classified as low, moderate, or high. One classification tells you where you stand relative to the widely used activity benchmark. A series of classifications taken monthly or bi-monthly shows whether your activity level is genuinely rising or falling — or whether it has stayed flat despite what feels like effort.

What the IPAQ-SF is and where it comes from

The International Physical Activity Questionnaire was developed as a cross-nationally standardised instrument for measuring physical activity in adult populations. The short form (IPAQ-SF) was validated in a major 12-country study involving 14 sites across six continents, published in Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise in 2003 (Craig et al., 2003, doi:10.1249/01.MSS.0000078924.61453.FB). That study — which remains the primary validation reference — confirmed test-retest reliability with a pooled Spearman correlation of approximately 0.80 across sites, and criterion validity against objective accelerometry with a median correlation of around 0.30.

The IPAQ-SF was designed specifically for population surveillance: a tool that is quick to complete, comparable across languages and cultures, and capable of placing respondents into activity categories with reasonable reliability. It was not designed to measure individual caloric expenditure with precision, to replace wearable sensors, or to diagnose health conditions. Understanding what it is built to do — and what it is not — is the key to using it well.

What the 7 questions cover

The IPAQ-SF short form consists of seven questions covering four domains of activity over the past seven days:

How many days you performed vigorous physical activity (like heavy lifting, aerobics, or fast cycling) lasting at least 10 minutes
How many hours and minutes per day you typically spent on that vigorous activity
How many days you performed moderate physical activity (like carrying light loads, cycling at regular pace, or recreational swimming) lasting at least 10 minutes
How many hours and minutes per day you typically spent on that moderate activity
How many days you walked for at least 10 minutes
How many hours and minutes per day you typically walked
How many hours you spent sitting on a typical weekday in the past week

The 10-minute threshold is intentional — it reflects the minimum bout length that research supported as health-relevant at the time of IPAQ development. The sitting question captures sedentary behaviour as a dimension separate from activity.

How the classification is calculated

Each activity type is assigned a MET value based on its intensity:

Walking: 3.3 METs
Moderate activity: 4.0 METs
Vigorous activity: 8.0 METs

MET-minutes for each domain are calculated by multiplying the MET value by minutes per day by days per week. The three domains are summed to give a total weekly MET-minute value, which is then classified:

Classification	Criteria
High	Vigorous activity on ≥3 days accumulating ≥1,500 MET-min/week — or any combination of walking, moderate, and vigorous activity on ≥7 days accumulating ≥3,000 MET-min/week
Moderate	Any combination accumulating 600–3,000 MET-min/week — or ≥3 days of vigorous activity lasting ≥20 min/day — or ≥5 days of moderate activity or walking lasting ≥30 min/day
Low	Activity that does not meet the criteria for either moderate or high

In practice, the moderate threshold of 600 MET-minutes per week corresponds approximately to 150 minutes of moderate activity — the lower boundary of the WHO physical activity recommendation for adults aged 18–64 (WHO, 2020). The high category corresponds approximately to 3–4 times that volume.

Any tool that correctly implements the IPAQ-SF handles this calculation automatically. You should never need to do the arithmetic yourself — your job is to answer the seven questions accurately.

How accurate is it — and what that means for you

The IPAQ-SF is a self-report tool, and self-report tools have a well-documented tendency to overestimate activity relative to objective measurement. The 12-country validation study found criterion validity correlations of around 0.30 against accelerometry — positive, but moderate (Craig et al., 2003). More recent comparative studies confirm the pattern:

A 2018 study in the Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport comparing the short IPAQ against ActiGraph accelerometers in hospital nurses found weak correlations (ρ = 0.31–0.40) and that self-reported sitting time was significantly lower than objectively measured sitting — meaning people recalled sitting less than they actually did (Prince et al., 2018, doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2018.01.018). A 2024 study in the European Journal of Medical Research comparing the IPAQ-SF against a Fibion thigh-mounted accelerometer in young adults found weak associations (ρ = 0.2–0.4) and low agreement, with proportional bias — those who were more active tended to overestimate most (Arumugam et al., 2024, doi:10.1186/s40001-024-01975-5).

None of this makes the IPAQ-SF useless. It makes it a tool appropriate for tracking trends in your own activity over time — and for placing yourself in a broad activity category relative to population benchmarks — rather than a precise calorie counter. The question to ask is not "how many MET-minutes did I accumulate this week exactly?" but "is my classification improving, holding, or declining?"

How physical activity levels look in Europe

The IPAQ classification matters partly because physical inactivity is common enough that where you fall in the distribution is informative. Data from the European Code Against Cancer, drawing on national surveys across EU member states, estimated that approximately 35% of the European adult population is physically inactive — meaning they do not meet minimum activity recommendations (Leitzmann et al., 2015, doi:10.1016/j.canep.2015.03.009). The pattern is consistent across national studies: inactivity is most common in older adults, people in sedentary jobs, and those with lower socioeconomic status.

The WHO 2020 Physical Activity Guidelines for adults (18–64 years) recommend at least 150–300 minutes of moderate-intensity or 75–150 minutes of vigorous-intensity aerobic activity per week, plus muscle-strengthening activities on 2 or more days. The IPAQ-SF moderate classification threshold is roughly calibrated to the lower end of this recommendation. Moving from low to moderate — and sustaining it — places you on the right side of a threshold that a large fraction of the population does not reach.

Why trends matter more than any single classification

A single IPAQ classification is a data point; a series of them is a story. Because the questionnaire asks about the past seven days, it is sensitive to recent variation — a holiday week, an injury, a period of heavy work. This sensitivity is a feature for tracking intentional change, and a limitation for drawing conclusions from a single reading.

A monthly or bi-monthly cadence produces a non-overlapping series of snapshots. Three or four readings begin to reveal patterns worth acting on:

A sustained low classification across multiple check-ins is a stronger signal than a single low result. It suggests that reduced activity is not a temporary fluctuation but a pattern.
A step from low to moderate held across two consecutive check-ins suggests that a behaviour change — a new walking routine, a lunchtime gym session — is actually taking hold.
A spike down during a high period that correlates with an identifiable event (illness, travel, injury) is normal variation, not a trend reversal. The following reading is the one to watch.

If you start a new activity programme and your IPAQ classification moves from low to moderate over the following two months, that is measurable progress — even if your Apple Watch data shows a less dramatic shift, or if you feel the effort was inconsistent.

How the IPAQ-SF and your Apple Watch data complement each other

Your Apple Watch estimates actual movement: steps, active calories, exercise minutes, and workout-specific metrics. It is objective in the sense that it measures what your body did, though wearable accelerometry has its own accuracy limitations. The IPAQ-SF captures your recall and appraisal of your activity: what you believe you did, coded into a validated classification system.

The two can tell different stories:

Low IPAQ + high Apple Watch activity: You are more active than you realise or recall — or you are mentally discounting activity that your wearable captures (spontaneous movement, incidental walking, light household tasks).
High IPAQ + low Apple Watch activity: You are overestimating your activity, as is common. The objective data is the more reliable anchor here.
Low IPAQ + low Apple Watch activity: Both sources agree. This alignment is the clearest signal that your activity level may be worth increasing.

Looking at both together — your activity classification alongside your wearable trends — gives you dimensions that neither source alone provides.

Where Sam Health fits in

Sam includes the IPAQ-SF as a recurring self-report check-in in both English and German. You receive a classification — low, moderate, or high — rather than a raw MET-minute figure, which is how the IPAQ is designed to be used. Your classification history appears in your monthly wellness report alongside your Apple Watch activity trends. If you are working toward moving from one category to the next, consecutive monthly classifications give you a concrete, reproducible record of whether you are getting there.

Try Sam Health

Sources

Craig, C.L., Marshall, A.L., Sjöström, M., Bauman, A.E., Booth, M.L., Ainsworth, B.E., Pratt, M., Ekelund, U., Yngve, A., Sallis, J.F., & Oja, P. (2003). International Physical Activity Questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 35(8), 1381–1395. https://doi.org/10.1249/01.MSS.0000078924.61453.FB. Retrieved via PubMed (PMID 12900694) 16 May 2026.
Prince, S.A., Butler, G.P., Kristjansson, E., Hogan, K., Benga, R., Billette, J.M., & Hutcheon, J. (2018). Comparing the IPAQ-SF against ActiGraph accelerometers in hospital nurses: A validation study of self-reported physical activity against objective measurement. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 21(5), 481–487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2018.01.018. Retrieved via PubMed (PMID 29500119) 16 May 2026.
Arumugam, A., Samuel, T., & Manikandan, N. (2024). Comparison of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Short Form with the Fibion accelerometer in assessing physical activity and sedentary behaviour in young adults in the UAE. European Journal of Medical Research, 29, 431. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40001-024-01975-5. Retrieved via PubMed (PMID 39155363) 16 May 2026.
Leitzmann, M., Powers, H., Anderson, A.S., Scoccianti, C., Berrino, F., Boutron-Ruault, M.C., Cecchini, M., Espina, C., Key, T.J., Norat, T., Wiseman, M., & Romieu, I. (2015). European Code against Cancer 4th Edition: Physical activity and cancer. Cancer Epidemiology, 39(Suppl 1), S46–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canep.2015.03.009. Retrieved via PubMed (PMID 26187327) 16 May 2026.
World Health Organization. (2020). WHO guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Geneva: WHO. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240015128. Accessed 16 May 2026.
IPAQ Research Committee. (2005). Guidelines for data processing and analysis of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) — Short and long forms. Retrieved from https://sites.google.com/site/theipaq/scoring-protocol. Accessed 16 May 2026.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does the IPAQ-SF measure?+

The IPAQ-SF measures the volume and intensity of physical activity you performed in the past seven days. It asks about vigorous activity (like running or cycling hard), moderate activity (like brisk walking or light cycling), and walking time. Sitting time is also recorded. The responses are converted into MET-minutes per week and classified as low, moderate, or high activity. It does not measure fitness, health status, or any medical outcome.

What is a 'low', 'moderate', or 'high' IPAQ classification?+

These are the three activity categories defined by the IPAQ Research Committee. Low means your activity does not meet the minimum thresholds for either moderate or high. Moderate means you accumulate at least 600 MET-minutes per week — roughly equivalent to around 150 minutes of moderate activity. High means you accumulate more than 3,000 MET-minutes per week, or meet the vigorous-specific sub-threshold (at least 3 days of vigorous activity totalling at least 1,500 MET-minutes). These categories align approximately with the WHO physical activity guidelines.

Is the IPAQ accurate compared to a fitness tracker?+

Not with high precision. The original 12-country validation of the IPAQ found criterion validity correlations of around 0.30 against objective accelerometer data (Craig et al., 2003). More recent studies confirm that self-reported activity tends to overestimate actual movement compared to device-based measurement, particularly for sitting time, which is significantly underreported. This does not make the IPAQ useless — it makes it a self-report tool best used for tracking trends over time rather than as an exact measure of calories burned or steps taken.

Who is the IPAQ-SF designed for?+

The short form was validated in adults aged 18–65 across 12 countries and is recommended by the IPAQ Research Committee for population monitoring and surveillance. It is not validated for children, adolescents under 18, or adults over 65, though it is sometimes used in those groups with appropriate caveats.

How often should I complete the IPAQ-SF?+

The IPAQ-SF asks about the past seven days, but a monthly or bi-monthly cadence is more useful for trend tracking than weekly completion. Very short intervals produce overlapping data with high noise; monthly or bi-monthly readings give you clean, non-overlapping snapshots that reveal whether your activity level is trending up, down, or staying flat over time.

Does my Apple Watch replace the IPAQ?+

No — the two tools measure different things. Your Apple Watch estimates your actual movement using accelerometry and heart rate data. The IPAQ-SF captures how you perceive and recall your activity. These perspectives regularly diverge: some people who are objectively active recall and report lower levels; others who are less active than they believe will overestimate. Using both together gives you a richer picture than either source provides alone.

Can the IPAQ tell me if my activity level is good for my health?+

The IPAQ classifies your self-reported activity as low, moderate, or high — categories that align broadly with international guidelines recommending at least 150 minutes of moderate activity per week for adults. But it is a self-report screening tool, not a clinical assessment. The classification tells you where you stand relative to that benchmark based on what you recall doing. It does not assess your cardiovascular fitness, body composition, or health risk directly.