Literature DB >> 10993415

Comparison of three methods for measuring the time spent in physical activity.

B E Ainsworth1, D R Bassett, S J Strath, A M Swartz, W L O'Brien, R W Thompson, D A Jones, C A Macera, C D Kimsey.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Three methods for measuring time spent in daily physical activity (PA) were compared during a 21-d period among 83 adults (38 men and 45 women).
METHODS: Each day, participants wore a Computer Science and Applications, Inc. (CSA) monitor and completed a 1-page, 48-item PA log that reflected time spent in household, occupational, transportation, sport, conditioning, and leisure activities. Once a week, participants also completed a telephone survey to identify the number of minutes spent each week in nonoccupational walking and in moderate intensity and hard/very hard-intensity PA. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Spearman rank-order correlations. Three equations developed to compute CSA cut points for moderate and hard/very hard PA were also compared with the PA logs and PA survey.
RESULTS: There was modest to good agreement for the time spent in different PA intensity categories between the three CSA cut point methods (r = 0.43-0.94, P < 0.001). Correlations between the CSA and PA logs ranged from r = 0.22 to r = 0.36, depending on the comparisons. Correlations between the survey items and PA logs were r = 0.26-0.54 (P < 0.01) for moderate and walking activities and r < 0.09 (P > 0.05) for hard/very hard activities. Correlations between the survey items and the CSA min per day varied according to the method used to compute the CSA intensity cut points.
CONCLUSIONS: The results were consistent with findings from other PA validation studies that show motion sensors, PA logs, and surveys reflect PA; however, these methods do not always provide similar estimates of the time spent in resting/light, moderate, or hard/very hard PA.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10993415     DOI: 10.1097/00005768-200009001-00004

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


  92 in total

1.  Limitations on the use of a single screening question to measure sedentary behavior.

Authors:  C A Macera; S A Ham; D A Jones; C D Kimsey; B E Ainsworth; L J Neff
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Predicting energy expenditure of physical activity using hip- and wrist-worn accelerometers.

Authors:  Kong Y Chen; Sari A Acra; Karen Majchrzak; Candice L Donahue; Lemont Baker; Linda Clemens; Ming Sun; Maciej S Buchowski
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 6.118

3.  Differential correlates of physical activity in urban and rural adults of various socioeconomic backgrounds in the United States.

Authors:  S E Parks; R A Housemann; R C Brownson
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 3.710

4.  Measuring the environment for friendliness toward physical activity: a comparison of the reliability of 3 questionnaires.

Authors:  Ross C Brownson; Jen Jen Chang; Amy A Eyler; Barbara E Ainsworth; Karen A Kirtland; Brian E Saelens; James F Sallis
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 9.308

5.  Accelerometer use in a physical activity intervention trial.

Authors:  Melissa A Napolitano; Kelley E Borradaile; Beth A Lewis; Jessica A Whiteley; Jaime L Longval; Alfred F Parisi; Anna E Albrecht; Christopher N Sciamanna; John M Jakicic; George D Papandonatos; Bess H Marcus
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2010-08-17       Impact factor: 2.226

6.  The Cost of Increasing Physical Activity and Maintaining Weight for Midlife Sedentary African American Women.

Authors:  Tricia J Johnson; Michael E Schoeny; Louis Fogg; JoEllen Wilbur
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2015-12-02       Impact factor: 5.725

7.  Response to an exercise intervention after endometrial cancer: differences between obese and non-obese survivors.

Authors:  K Basen-Engquist; C Carmack; J Brown; A Jhingran; G Baum; J Song; S Scruggs; M C Swartz; M G Cox; K H Lu
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 5.482

8.  Social cognitive correlates of leisure time physical activity among Latinos.

Authors:  David X Marquez; Edward McAuley
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2006-05-03

9.  Development of the Environmental Assessment Tool (EAT) to measure organizational physical and social support for worksite obesity prevention programs.

Authors:  David M Dejoy; Mark G Wilson; Ron Z Goetzel; Ronald J Ozminkowski; Shaohung Wang; Kristin M Baker; Heather M Bowen; Karen J Tully
Journal:  J Occup Environ Med       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 2.162

10.  Perceived influences on physical activity and diet in low-income adults from two rural counties.

Authors:  Betty L Kaiser; Roger L Brown; Linda C Baumann
Journal:  Nurs Res       Date:  2010 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.381

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.