Browse

Background: This article evaluates the evolution of physical activity and health research in China through a bibliometric analysis focused on number of publications, study areas, and sex balance in authorship. Methods: A systematic review was conducted by the Global Observatory for Physical Activity for “physical activity and health” publications between 1950 and 2019. Here, we focus on the 610 Chinese publications identified, defined as those in which data collection took place in China. We assessed the number of publications, classified them into 5 areas (1) surveillance, (2) correlates and determinants, (3) health consequences, (4) interventions, and (5) policy, and analyzed female participation in authorship. Results: The first Chinese publication identified in the review was in 1990. Since, the average number of physical activity and health publications increased from one per year in the 1990s to 7.6 per year in the 2000s, and to 47 per year in the 2010s. Most publications focused on the correlates and determinants (38.7%) and the health consequences of physical activity (35.9%). Physical activity policy accounted for 2.3% of the publications. In the 1990s, 64% of the publications included at least one female author; this proportion increased to 90% in the 2010s. Conclusion: Despite a slow start, China’s research on physical activity and health has grown rapidly since 2000. The distribution of publications by study areas and female participation in authorship is similar to that observed globally, with fewer publications focused on interventions and policy as compared with other topics.

In 2022, it became possible to produce ActiGraph counts from raw accelerometer data without use of ActiLife software. This supports the availability and use of transparent, open-source methods for producing physical behavior outcomes from accelerometer data. However, questions remain regarding the implications of the availability of open-source ActiGraph counts. This Expert Question and Answer paper solicited and summarized feedback from several noted physical behavior measurement experts on five questions related to open-source counts. The experts agreed that open-source, transparent, and translatable methods help with harmonization of accelerometer methods. However, there were mixed views as to the importance of open-source counts and their place in the field moving forward. This Expert Question and Answer provides initial feedback, but more research both within this special issue and to be conducted moving forward will help to inform whether and how open-source counts will be accepted and adopted for use for device-based physical behavior assessments.

Background: Physical Activity 4 Everyone (PA4E1) is a whole-school physical activity program, with demonstrated efficacy (2012–2014). PA4E1 was adapted (scaled-up) and tested in a scale-up trial (2017–2020). This process evaluation study of the scale-up trial had 2 aims. First, to describe the acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of PA4E1 in the scale-up trial, from the perspective of school staff involved in the program management and delivery. Second, to generate themes that may explain school staff assessments of acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility. Methods: Data were collected at various time points throughout the 2-year implementation phase. Online surveys were collected from In-School Champions, Head Physical Education teachers, Principals, and Physical Education teachers (quantitative data). Focus groups and interviews were conducted with In-School Champions, Principals, and Physical Education teachers (qualitative data). Existing published data on website engagement, adaptations, modifications, and the scale-up trial primary outcome (implementation of physical activity practices) were triangulated with the quantitative and qualitative during analysis, to generate themes. Results: School staff delivering PA4E1 reported it was highly acceptable, appropriate, and feasible. Seven themes were generated relating to acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility. The themes related to how the program was funded, the delivery modes of implementation support, the identification of easy-wins, the recruitment of the right in-school champion, facilitating principal buy-in, mitigating the impact of school staff turnover, and engaging the whole school. Conclusions: Recommendations are made to inform future adaptations for PA4E1 and potentially school-based physical activity programs more generally. The findings may inform future scalability assessments of the suitability of programs for scale-up.

There are currently several methods available to generate summary measures from acceleration, while ActiGraph (AG) counts as the first method to be used at large scale. The recent disclosure of the AG counts method exposes its intrinsic properties, which has not been accessible before. The intrinsic properties are the raw acceleration processing elements like filtering, rectification, or dead-band elimination, which are used to estimate physical activity intensity. The aim of this technical note is to compare the intrinsic properties of AG counts method with five alternatives (Euclidean Norm Minus One, mean average deviation, Activity Index, Rate of Change Accelerometry Movement, and Monitor-Independent Movement Summary) and how rescaling of AG counts and Monitor-Independent Movement Summary/minute into the International System of Units can be used to harmonize all summary measures and facilitate direct comparison. A total of 12 intrinsic properties are compared, and the overview demonstrates that there is large diversity regarding the specific intrinsic property elements being included, and with Monitor-Independent Movement Summary to be the only summary measure, which has been developed considering all elements. The harmonized output generated from all summary methods is highly comparable within common activities, but to obtain a robust summary measure recorded in subjects during free-living conditions, more research is warranted to evaluate the effect of the different intrinsic properties.