Dataset Information

Validation of a previous-day recall measure of active and sedentary behaviors.

ABSTRACT: A previous-day recall (PDR) may be a less error-prone alternative to traditional questionnaire-based estimates of physical activity and sedentary behavior (e.g., past year), but the validity of the method is not established. We evaluated the validity of an interviewer administered PDR in adolescents (12-17 yr) and adults (18-71 yr).In a 7-d study, participants completed three PDR, wore two activity monitors, and completed measures of social desirability and body mass index. PDR measures of active and sedentary time was contrasted against an accelerometer (ActiGraph) by comparing both to a valid reference measure (activPAL) using measurement error modeling and traditional validation approaches.Age- and sex-specific mixed models comparing PDR to activPAL indicated the following: 1) there was a strong linear relationship between measures for sedentary (regression slope, ?1 = 0.80-1.13) and active time (?1 = 0.64-1.09), 2) person-specific bias was lower than random error, and 3) correlations were high (sedentary: r = 0.60-0.81; active: r = 0.52-0.80). Reporting errors were not associated with body mass index or social desirability. Models comparing ActiGraph to activPAL indicated the following: 1) there was a weaker linear relationship between measures for sedentary (?1 = 0.63-0.73) and active time (?1 = 0.61-0.72), (2) person-specific bias was slightly larger than random error, and (3) correlations were high (sedentary: r = 0.68-0.77; active: r = 0.57-0.79).Correlations between the PDR and the activPAL were high, systematic reporting errors were low, and the validity of the PDR was comparable with the ActiGraph. PDR may have value in studies of physical activity and health, particularly those interested in measuring the specific type, location, and purpose of activity-related behaviors.

SUBMITTER: Matthews CE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3717193 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Validation of a previous-day recall measure of active and sedentary behaviors.

Matthews Charles E CE Keadle Sarah Kozey SK Sampson Joshua J Lyden Kate K Bowles Heather R HR Moore Stephen C SC Libertine Amanda A Freedson Patty S PS Fowke Jay H JH

Medicine and science in sports and exercise 20130801 8

<h4>Purpose</h4>A previous-day recall (PDR) may be a less error-prone alternative to traditional questionnaire-based estimates of physical activity and sedentary behavior (e.g., past year), but the validity of the method is not established. We evaluated the validity of an interviewer administered PDR in adolescents (12-17 yr) and adults (18-71 yr).<h4>Methods</h4>In a 7-d study, participants completed three PDR, wore two activity monitors, and completed measures of social desirability and body m ...[more]

PMID: 23863547

Similar Datasets

Project description:PURPOSE:Physical activity may reduce endogenous estrogens, but few studies have assessed effects on estrogen metabolism and none have evaluated sedentary behavior in relation to estrogen metabolism. We assessed relationships between accelerometer-measured physical activity and sedentary behavior and 15 urinary estrogens and estrogen metabolites (EM) among postmenopausal controls from a population-based breast cancer case-control study conducted in Poland (2000-2003). METHODS:Postmenopausal women (N = 542) were ages 40 to 72 yr and not currently using hormone therapy. Accelerometers, worn for 7 d, were used to derive measures of average activity (counts per day) and sedentary behavior (<100 counts per minute per day). Estrogen metabolites were measured in 12-h urine samples using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Estrogen metabolites were analyzed individually, in metabolic pathways (C-2, -4, or -16), and as ratios relative to parent estrogens. Geometric means of estrogen metabolites by tertiles of accelerometer-measures, adjusted for age and body mass, were computed using linear models. RESULTS:High activity was associated with lower levels of estrone and estradiol (P trend = 0.01), whereas increased sedentary time was positively associated with these parent estrogens (P trend = 0.04). Inverse associations were observed between high activity and 2-methoxyestradiol, 4-methoxyestradiol, 17-epiestriol, and 16-epiestriol (P trend = 0.03). Sedentary time was positively associated with methylated catechols in the 2- and 4-hydroxylation pathways (P trend ? 0.04). Women in the highest tertile of activity had increased hydroxylation at the C-2, -4, and -16 sites relative to parent estrogens (P trend ? 0.02), whereas increased sedentary time was associated with a lower 16-pathway/parent estrogen ratio (P trend = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS:Higher activity was associated with lower urinary estrogens, possibly through increased estrogen hydroxylation and subsequent metabolism, whereas sedentary behavior may reduce metabolism.

Project description:BackgroundSedentary behaviour is a public health concern that requires surveillance and epidemiological research. For such large scale studies, self-report tools are a pragmatic measurement solution. A large number of self-report tools are currently in use, but few have been validated against an objective measure of sedentary time and there is no comparative information between tools to guide choice or to enable comparison between studies. The aim of this study was to provide a systematic comparison, generalisable to all tools, of the validity of self-report measures of sedentary time against a gold standard sedentary time objective monitor.MethodsCross sectional data from three cohorts (N?=?700) were used in this validation study. Eighteen self-report measures of sedentary time, based on the TAxonomy of Self-report SB Tools (TASST) framework, were compared against an objective measure of postural sitting (activPAL) to provide information, generalizable to all existing tools, on agreement and precision using Bland-Altman statistics, on criterion validity using Pearson correlation, and on data loss.ResultsAll self-report measures showed poor accuracy compared with the objective measure of sedentary time, with very wide limits of agreement and poor precision (random error?>?2.5 h). Most tools under-reported total sedentary time and demonstrated low correlations with objective data. The type of assessment used by the tool, whether direct, proxy, or a composite measure, influenced the measurement characteristics. Proxy measures (TV time) and single item direct measures using a visual analogue scale to assess the proportion of the day spent sitting, showed the best combination of precision and data loss. The recall period (e.g. previous week) had little influence on measurement characteristics.ConclusionSelf-report measures of sedentary time result in large bias, poor precision and low correlation with an objective measure of sedentary time. Choice of tool depends on the research context, design and question. Choice can be guided by this systematic comparative validation and, in the case of population surveillance, it recommends to use a visual analog scale and a 7 day recall period. Comparison between studies and improving population estimates of average sedentary time, is possible with the comparative correction factors provided.

Dataset Information

Validation of a previous-day recall measure of active and sedentary behaviors.

Publications

Validation of a previous-day recall measure of active and sedentary behaviors.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets