CONTEXT: Advances in device-based measures have led researchers to question the value of reported measures of physical activity or sedentary behavior. The premise of the Workshop on Measurement of Active and Sedentary Behaviors: Closing the Gaps in Self-Report Methods, held in July 2010, was that assessment of behavior by self-report is a valuable approach. OBJECTIVE: To provide suggestions to optimize the value of reported physical activity and sedentary behavior, we 1) discuss the constructs that devices and reports of behavior can measure, 2) develop a framework to help guide decision-making about the best approach to physical activity and sedentary behavior assessment in a given situation, and 3) address the potential for combining reported behavior methods with device-based monitoring to enhance both approaches. PROCESS: After participation in a workshop breakout session, coauthors summarized the ideas presented and reached consensus on the material presented here. CONCLUSIONS: To select appropriate physical activity assessment methods and correctly interpret the measures obtained, researchers should carefully consider the purpose for assessment, physical activity constructs of interest, characteristics of the population and measurement tool, and the theoretical link between the exposure and outcome of interest.
CONTEXT: Advances in device-based measures have led researchers to question the value of reported measures of physical activity or sedentary behavior. The premise of the Workshop on Measurement of Active and Sedentary Behaviors: Closing the Gaps in Self-Report Methods, held in July 2010, was that assessment of behavior by self-report is a valuable approach. OBJECTIVE: To provide suggestions to optimize the value of reported physical activity and sedentary behavior, we 1) discuss the constructs that devices and reports of behavior can measure, 2) develop a framework to help guide decision-making about the best approach to physical activity and sedentary behavior assessment in a given situation, and 3) address the potential for combining reported behavior methods with device-based monitoring to enhance both approaches. PROCESS: After participation in a workshop breakout session, coauthors summarized the ideas presented and reached consensus on the material presented here. CONCLUSIONS: To select appropriate physical activity assessment methods and correctly interpret the measures obtained, researchers should carefully consider the purpose for assessment, physical activity constructs of interest, characteristics of the population and measurement tool, and the theoretical link between the exposure and outcome of interest.
Authors: Gregory J Welk; Youngwon Kim; Bryan Stanfill; David A Osthus; Miguel A Calabro; Sarah M Nusser; Alicia Carriquiry Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2014-10 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Ilona Csizmadi; Heather K Neilson; Karen A Kopciuk; Farah Khandwala; Andrew Liu; Christine M Friedenreich; Yutaka Yasui; Rémi Rabasa-Lhoret; Heather E Bryant; David C W Lau; Paula J Robson Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2014-07-19 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Marquis Hawkins; Deirdre K Tobias; Hala B Alessa; Andrea K Chomistek; Junaidah B Barnett; Walter C Willett; Susan E Hankinson Journal: J Phys Act Health Date: 2019-04-11
Authors: Elva M Arredondo; Daniela Sotres-Alvarez; Mark Stoutenberg; Sonia M Davis; Noe C Crespo; Mercedes R Carnethon; Sheila F Castañeda; Carmen R Isasi; Rebeca A Espinoza; Martha L Daviglus; Lilian G Perez; Kelly R Evenson Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2015-11-18 Impact factor: 5.043