Gregory J Welk1, Nicholas K Beyler, Youngwon Kim, Charles E Matthews. 1. 1Department of Kinesiology, Iowa State University, Ames, IA; 2Department of Data Science and Statistics, Mathematica Policy Research, Washington, DC; 3MRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, UNITED KINGDOM; 4Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Nutritional Epidemiology Branch, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Calibration equations offer potential to improve the accuracy and utility of self-report measures of physical activity (PA) and sedentary behavior (SB) by rescaling potentially biased estimates. The present study evaluates calibration models designed to estimate PA and SB in a representative sample of adults from the Physical Activity Measurement Study. METHODS: Participants in the Physical Activity Measurement Study project completed replicate single-day trials that involved wearing a Sensewear armband (SWA) monitor for 24 h followed by a telephone administered 24-h PA recall (PAR). Comprehensive statistical model selection and validation procedures were used to develop and test separate calibration models designed to predict objectively measured SB and moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) from self-reported PAR data. Equivalence testing was used to evaluate the equivalence of the model-predicted values with the objective measures in a separate holdout sample. RESULTS: The final prediction model for both SB and MVPA included reported time spent in SB and MVPA, as well as terms capturing sex, age, education, and body mass index. Cross-validation analyses on an independent sample exhibited high correlations with observed SB (r = 0.72) and MVPA (r = 0.75). Equivalence testing demonstrated that the model-predicted values were statistically equivalent to the corresponding objective values for both SB and MVPA. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that simple regression models can be used to statistically adjust for overestimation or underestimation in self-report measures among different segments of the population. The models produced group estimates from the PAR that were statistically equivalent to the observed time spent in SB and MVPA obtained from the objective SWA monitor; however, additional work is needed to correct for estimates of individual behavior.
INTRODUCTION: Calibration equations offer potential to improve the accuracy and utility of self-report measures of physical activity (PA) and sedentary behavior (SB) by rescaling potentially biased estimates. The present study evaluates calibration models designed to estimate PA and SB in a representative sample of adults from the Physical Activity Measurement Study. METHODS:Participants in the Physical Activity Measurement Study project completed replicate single-day trials that involved wearing a Sensewear armband (SWA) monitor for 24 h followed by a telephone administered 24-h PA recall (PAR). Comprehensive statistical model selection and validation procedures were used to develop and test separate calibration models designed to predict objectively measured SB and moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) from self-reported PAR data. Equivalence testing was used to evaluate the equivalence of the model-predicted values with the objective measures in a separate holdout sample. RESULTS: The final prediction model for both SB and MVPA included reported time spent in SB and MVPA, as well as terms capturing sex, age, education, and body mass index. Cross-validation analyses on an independent sample exhibited high correlations with observed SB (r = 0.72) and MVPA (r = 0.75). Equivalence testing demonstrated that the model-predicted values were statistically equivalent to the corresponding objective values for both SB and MVPA. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that simple regression models can be used to statistically adjust for overestimation or underestimation in self-report measures among different segments of the population. The models produced group estimates from the PAR that were statistically equivalent to the observed time spent in SB and MVPA obtained from the objective SWA monitor; however, additional work is needed to correct for estimates of individual behavior.
Authors: Lesley F Tinker; Gloria E Sarto; Barbara V Howard; Ying Huang; Marian L Neuhouser; Yasmin Mossavar-Rahmani; Jeannette M Beasley; Karen L Margolis; Charles B Eaton; Lawrence S Phillips; Ross L Prentice Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2011-11-09 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Miguel A Calabro; Gregory J Welk; Alicia L Carriquiry; Sarah M Nusser; Nicholas K Beyler; Charles E Mathews Journal: J Phys Act Health Date: 2009-03
Authors: Marian L Neuhouser; Chongzhi Di; Lesley F Tinker; Cynthia Thomson; Barbara Sternfeld; Yasmin Mossavar-Rahmani; Marcia L Stefanick; Stacy Sims; J David Curb; Michael Lamonte; Rebecca Seguin; Karen C Johnson; Ross L Prentice Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2013-02-22 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: S Berntsen; R Hageberg; A Aandstad; P Mowinckel; S A Anderssen; K-H Carlsen; L B Andersen Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2008-07-15 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: Charles E Matthews; Sarah Kozey Keadle; Joshua Sampson; Kate Lyden; Heather R Bowles; Stephen C Moore; Amanda Libertine; Patty S Freedson; Jay H Fowke Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Richard P Troiano; David Berrigan; Kevin W Dodd; Louise C Mâsse; Timothy Tilert; Margaret McDowell Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Charles E Matthews; Sarah Kozey Keadle; David Berrigan; John Staudenmayer; Pedro F Saint-Maurice; Richard P Troiano; Patty S Freedson Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Kristen M Metcalf; Barbara I Baquero; Mayra L Coronado Garcia; Shelby L Francis; Kathleen F Janz; Helena H Laroche; Daniel K Sewell Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2018-03-27 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Jeong-Hui Park; Youngwon Kim; Gregory J Welk; Pedro Silva; Jung-Min Lee Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-12-11 Impact factor: 3.390