Literature DB >> 10647542

Self-report measures and scoring protocols affect prevalence estimates of meeting physical activity guidelines.

J A Sarkin1, J F Nichols, J F Sallis, K J Calfas.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Prevalence estimates of meeting the guidelines for physical activity based on various self-report measures were compared, and the effects of various scoring protocols on the estimates were evaluated.
METHOD: A sample of 575 university students aged 24.5 +/- 1.9 yr (56% women, 54% Euro-American) completed the Seven-Day Physical Activity Recall interview (PAR), Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS), and National Health Interview Survey 1991 (NHIS). To determine the prevalence of meeting the ACSM (1990) fitness and the CDC/ACSM (1995) health-related guidelines, various scoring protocols were employed that closely approximated the recommendations. Protocols varied by whether frequency and duration or duration only were considered. For the health-related guidelines, scoring protocols also varied depending on the intensity of activities considered.
RESULTS: Depending on the scoring protocol and instrument used, the proportion meeting the fitness guidelines ranged from 32 to 59%. The NHIS, YRBS, and PAR resulted in significantly different proportions of those meeting the health-related guideline, ranging from 4 to 70%.
CONCLUSION: The type of measure as well as the scoring protocol affected prevalence estimates of meeting the physical activity guidelines. This study indicates the difficulty of comparing prevalence rates across studies using different measures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10647542     DOI: 10.1097/00005768-200001000-00022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc        ISSN: 0195-9131            Impact factor:   5.411


  20 in total

Review 1.  Challenges and opportunities for measuring physical activity in sedentary adults.

Authors:  C E Tudor-Locke; A M Myers
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 11.136

2.  Neighborhood context and youth cardiovascular health behaviors.

Authors:  Rebecca E Lee; Catherine Cubbin
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 3.  Factors affecting levels of physical activity in adults.

Authors:  Vern Seefeldt; Robert M Malina; Michael A Clark
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 4.  Limits to the measurement of habitual physical activity by questionnaires.

Authors:  R J Shephard
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 13.800

5.  Sociodemographic and geographic correlates of meeting current recommendations for physical activity in middle-aged French adults: the Supplémentation en Vitamines et Minéraux Antioxydants (SUVIMAX) Study.

Authors:  Sandrine Bertrais; Paul Preziosi; Louise Mennen; Pilar Galan; Serge Hercberg; Jean-Michel Oppert
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 6.  Measurement of human energy expenditure, with particular reference to field studies: an historical perspective.

Authors:  Roy J Shephard; Yukitoshi Aoyagi
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2011-12-11       Impact factor: 3.078

7.  Can lay-led walking programmes increase physical activity in middle aged adults? A randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  S E Lamb; H P Bartlett; A Ashley; W Bird
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 3.710

8.  Tai Chi for osteopenic women: design and rationale of a pragmatic randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Peter M Wayne; Julie E Buring; Roger B Davis; Ellen M Connors; Paolo Bonato; Benjamin Patritti; Mary Fischer; Gloria Y Yeh; Calvin J Cohen; Danette Carroll; Douglas P Kiel
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2010-03-01       Impact factor: 2.362

9.  Physical activity and quality of life in adult survivors of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

Authors:  Keith M Bellizzi; Julia H Rowland; Neeraj K Arora; Ann S Hamilton; Melissa Farmer Miller; Noreen M Aziz
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-01-12       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Comparing psychosocial predictors of physical activity adoption and maintenance.

Authors:  David M Williams; Beth A Lewis; Shira Dunsiger; Jessica A Whiteley; George D Papandonatos; Melissa A Napolitano; Beth C Bock; Joseph T Ciccolo; Bess H Marcus
Journal:  Ann Behav Med       Date:  2008-09-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.