Literature DB >> 30453111

Self-reported versus GPS-derived indicators of daily mobility in a sample of healthy older adults.

Michelle Pasquale Fillekes1, Christina Röcke2, Marko Katana3, Robert Weibel4.   

Abstract

In light of novel opportunities to use sensor data to observe individuals' day-to-day mobility in the context of healthy aging research, it is important to understand how meaningful mobility indicators can be extracted from such data and to which degree these sensor-derived indicators are comparable to corresponding self-reports. We used sensor (GPS and accelerometer) and self-reported data from 27 healthy older adults (≥67 years) who participated in the MOASIS project over a 30-day period. Based on sensor data we computed three commonly used daily mobility indicators: life space (LS), travel duration using passive (i.e., motorized) modes of transportation (pMOT) and travel duration using active (i.e., non-motorized) modes of transportation (aMOT). We assessed the degree to which these sensor-derived indicators compare to corresponding self-reports at a within-person level, computing intraindividual correlations (iCorrs), subsequently assessing whether iCorrs can be associated with participants' socio-demographic characteristics on a between-person level. Moderate to large positive mean iCorrs between the respective self-reported and sensor-derived indicators were found (r = 0.75 for LS, 0.51 for pMOT and 0.36 for aMOT). In comparison to sensor-derived indicators, self-reported LS slightly underestimates, while self-reported aMOT as well as pMOT considerably overestimate the amount of daily mobility. Participants with access to a car have higher probabilities of agreement in the pMOT indicator. Sensor-based assessments are promising as they are "objective", involve less participant burden and observations can be extended over long periods. The findings of this paper help researchers on mobility and aging to estimate the magnitude and direction of potential differences in the assessed variable due to the assessment methods.
Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Comparison; GPS; Life-space questionnaire; Mobility indicators; Mode of transportation; Self-reports

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30453111     DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.11.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Sci Med        ISSN: 0277-9536            Impact factor:   4.634


  13 in total

1.  GPS2space: An Open-source Python Library for Spatial Measure Extraction from GPS Data.

Authors:  Shuai Zhou; Yanling Li; Guangqing Chi; Junjun Yin; Zita Oravecz; Yosef Bodovski; Naomi P Friedman; Scott I Vrieze; Sy-Miin Chow
Journal:  J Behav Data Sci       Date:  2021-11-08

2.  Deviations from typical paths: a novel approach to working with GPS data in the behavioral sciences.

Authors:  Karen E Nielsen; Shannon T Mejía; Richard Gonzalez
Journal:  Int J Health Geogr       Date:  2022-06-18       Impact factor: 5.310

3.  Comparing GPS-Based Community Mobility Measures with Self-report Assessments in Older Adults with Parkinson's Disease.

Authors:  Lynn Zhu; Christian Duval; Patrick Boissy; Manuel Montero-Odasso; Guangyong Zou; Mandar Jog; Mark Speechley
Journal:  J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci       Date:  2020-11-13       Impact factor: 6.053

4.  Towards a comprehensive set of GPS-based indicators reflecting the multidimensional nature of daily mobility for applications in health and aging research.

Authors:  Michelle Pasquale Fillekes; Eleftheria Giannouli; Eun-Kyeong Kim; Wiebren Zijlstra; Robert Weibel
Journal:  Int J Health Geogr       Date:  2019-07-24       Impact factor: 3.918

5.  Assessing Older Adults' Daily Mobility: A Comparison of GPS-Derived and Self-Reported Mobility Indicators.

Authors:  Michelle Pasquale Fillekes; Eun-Kyeong Kim; Rieke Trumpf; Wiebren Zijlstra; Eleftheria Giannouli; Robert Weibel
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2019-10-19       Impact factor: 3.576

6.  Merging self-reported with technically sensed data for tracking mobility behavior in a naturalistic intervention study. Insights from the GISMO study.

Authors:  Martin Loidl; Petra Stutz; Maria Dolores Fernandez Lapuente de Battre; Christian Schmied; Bernhard Reich; Philipp Bohm; Norbert Sedlacek; Josef Niebauer; David Niederseer
Journal:  Scand J Med Sci Sports       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 4.221

7.  Can probability neglect bias promote social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic?

Authors:  Mariko Shimizu; Takayoshi Yoshimura; Eiji Hato
Journal:  Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav       Date:  2021-12-15

8.  The development and validation of a prototype mobility tracker for assessing the life space mobility and activity participation of older adults.

Authors:  Soon Hoe Ho; Dion Piu Sern Tan; Pey June Tan; Ka Wei Ng; Zoe Zon Be Lim; Isabel Hui Leng Ng; Lok Hang Wong; Mimaika Luluina Ginting; Belinda Yuen; Ullal Jagadish Mallya; Mei Sian Chong; Chek Hooi Wong
Journal:  BMC Geriatr       Date:  2020-07-22       Impact factor: 3.921

9.  Psychological Reactance to Mobility Restrictions Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Japanese Population Study.

Authors:  Hiroyuki Sakai; Mariko Shimizu; Takayoshi Yoshimura; Eiji Hato
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-06-11

10.  Mobility enhancement among older adults 75 + in rural areas: Study protocol of the MOBILE randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Christine Haeger; Sandra A Mümken; Julie L O'Sullivan; Robert P Spang; Jan-Niklas Voigt-Antons; Martin Stockburger; Dagmar Dräger; Paul Gellert
Journal:  BMC Geriatr       Date:  2022-01-20       Impact factor: 3.921

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.