Literature DB >> 19054715

Objective monitoring of physical activity in children: considerations for instrument selection.

James J McClain1, Catrine Tudor-Locke.   

Abstract

There has been a rapid recent increase in both the number and type of objective physical activity (PA) assessment instruments which are commercially available to researchers, practitioners, and consumers. Although this has provided improved capacity for PA assessment, it also presents a somewhat bewildering range of options related to instrument selection for users of these technologies. The purpose of this review is to provide a primer to guide selection of instruments for the objective monitoring of children's PA. In an effort to inform without overwhelming, it is not intended to be exhaustive in terms of all available instruments. A general overview is provided of two primary categories of objective monitors: pedometers and accelerometers. Within each category we focus on distinctly relevant options and features important to consider during instrument selection. In general, the desired outcome measure will determine the specific instrument category, options, and features from which the ultimate instrument choice is made. Other considerations include evidence of validity and reliability, cost, computer interface and download options, memory capacity, data aggregation and storage methods, and general participant and researcher burden associated with instrument use. There is no single objective PA assessment instrument that is appropriate for all situations, populations, and research questions. Further, we can anticipate that the commercial nature of these instruments will drive an even greater range of features and options in the future, increasing both the opportunity and the challenge for objectively assessing PA in children.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19054715     DOI: 10.1016/j.jsams.2008.09.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Sci Med Sport        ISSN: 1878-1861            Impact factor:   4.319


  17 in total

Review 1.  Practical physical activity measurement in youth: a review of contemporary approaches.

Authors:  Jerome N Rachele; Steven M McPhail; Tracy L Washington; Thomas F Cuddihy
Journal:  World J Pediatr       Date:  2012-08-12       Impact factor: 2.764

2.  Physical activity measurements: lessons learned from the pathways study.

Authors:  Scott B Going
Journal:  J Public Health Manag Pract       Date:  2010 Sep-Oct

3.  Accelerometry-based physical activity and exercise capacity in pediatric kidney transplant patients.

Authors:  Camillia G Clark; Marja Cantell; Susan Crawford; Lorraine A Hamiwka
Journal:  Pediatr Nephrol       Date:  2011-11-25       Impact factor: 3.714

4.  Development and testing of the BONES physical activity survey for young children.

Authors:  Christina D Economos; Erin Hennessy; Jennifer M Sacheck; M Kyla Shea; Elena N Naumova
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2010-08-31       Impact factor: 2.362

5.  A comparison of two motion sensors for the assessment of free-living physical activity of adolescents.

Authors:  Roman Cuberek; Walid El Ansari; Karel Frömel; Krzysztof Skalik; Erik Sigmund
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2010-04-06       Impact factor: 3.390

6.  Practical guide to measuring physical activity.

Authors:  Louisa G Sylvia; Emily E Bernstein; Jane L Hubbard; Leigh Keating; Ellen J Anderson
Journal:  J Acad Nutr Diet       Date:  2013-11-28       Impact factor: 4.910

7.  Step counts and body mass index among 9-14 years old greek schoolchildren.

Authors:  Maria Michalopoulou; Vassilios Gourgoulis; Thomas Kourtessis; Antonios Kambas; Martina Dimitrou; Helen Gretziou
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2011-03-01       Impact factor: 2.988

8.  The Active for Life Year 5 (AFLY5) school based cluster randomised controlled trial: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Debbie A Lawlor; Russell Jago; Sian M Noble; Catherine R Chittleborough; Rona Campbell; Julie Mytton; Laura D Howe; Tim J Peters; Ruth R Kipping
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2011-07-24       Impact factor: 2.279

9.  A cluster randomised trial of a school-based intervention to prevent decline in adolescent physical activity levels: study protocol for the 'Physical Activity 4 Everyone' trial.

Authors:  Rachel Sutherland; Elizabeth Campbell; David R Lubans; Philip J Morgan; Anthony D Okely; Nicole Nathan; Luke Wolfenden; Jannah Jones; Lynda Davies; Karen Gillham; John Wiggers
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2013-01-22       Impact factor: 3.295

10.  The objective measurement of physical activity and sedentary behaviour in 2-3 year olds and their parents: a cross-sectional feasibility study in the bi-ethnic Born in Bradford cohort.

Authors:  Silvia Costa; Sally E Barber; Noël Cameron; Stacy A Clemes
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2015-11-11       Impact factor: 3.295

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.