Search Results

You are looking at 61 - 70 of 369 items for :

  • "physical activity" x
  • User-accessible content x
Clear All
Full access

Richard P. Troiano, Kelley K. Pettee Gabriel, Gregory J. Welk, Neville Owen and Barbara Sternfeld

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.

Full access

Jennifer McConnell-Nzunga, Katie A. Weatherson, Louise Masse, Valerie Carson, Guy Faulkner, Erica Lau, Heather McKay, Viviene Temple, Luke Wolfenden and Patti J. Naylor

Physical activity (PA) is critical to early childhood development, as it is associated with motor skill acquisition, psychosocial, cognitive and language development, and physical health. 1 Many Canadian children are not active enough to achieve these health benefits, as national surveys from 2009

Full access

Xiaolin Yang, Irinja Lounassalo, Anna Kankaanpää, Mirja Hirvensalo, Suvi P. Rovio, Asko Tolvanen, Stuart J.H. Biddle, Harri Helajärvi, Sanna H. Palomäki, Kasper Salin, Nina Hutri-Kähönen, Olli T. Raitakari and Tuija H. Tammelin

adverse health and behavioral outcomes than other domains of sedentary behavior (eg, using a computer, sitting during transportation, or sitting at work), 4 , 5 and it may even lead to premature deaths during adulthood. 6 On the other hand, evidence shows that regular leisure-time physical activity

Full access

Erin Strutz, Raymond Browning, Stephanie Smith, Barbara Lohse and Leslie Cunningham-Sabo

Despite recognition that more physically active youth and adults maintain better overall health, 1 , 2 physical activity (PA) levels continue to remain below the number of recommended daily minutes. 3 Current PA guidelines urge children to engage in a minimum of 60 minutes of daily moderate

Full access

Philippa M. Dall, Dawn A. Skelton, Manon L. Dontje, Elaine H. Coulter, Sally Stewart, Simon R. Cox, Richard J. Shaw, Iva Čukić, Claire F. Fitzsimons, Carolyn A. Greig, Malcolm H. Granat, Geoff Der, Ian J. Deary, Sebastien F.M. Chastin and On behalf of the Seniors USP Team

Physical activity (PA) and sedentary behavior (SB) are important modifiable risk factors related to a range of health conditions, including mortality, cardiovascular and metabolic disease, and cancer ( Biswas et al., 2015 ; Ekelund et al., 2016 ). Objective measures, using body-worn sensors

Open access

Stephanie Kneeshaw-Price, Brian Saelens, James Sallis, Karen Glanz, Lawrence Frank, Jacqueline Kerr, Peggy Hannon, David Grembowski, KC Gary Chan and Kelli Cain

Knowledge of where children are active may lead to more informed policies about how and where to intervene and improve physical activity. This study examined where children aged 6–11 were physically active using time-stamped accelerometer data and parent-reported place logs and assessed the association of physical-activity location variation with demographic factors. Children spent most time and did most physical activity at home and school. Although neighborhood time was limited, this time was more proportionally active than time in other locations (e.g., active 42.1% of time in neighborhood vs. 18.1% of time at home). Children with any neighborhood-based physical activity had higher average total physical activity. Policies and environments that encourage children to spend time outdoors in their neighborhoods could result in higher overall physical activity.

Full access

169 7 th ISPAH Congress Committees Organising Committee Co-Chairs Dr Michael Brannan, National Lead for Physical Activity, Public Health England Dr Karen Milton, Lecturer in Public Health, University of East Anglia Sarah Ruane, Strategic Lead—Health, Sport England Members Beelin Baxter, Senior

Full access

Kara N. Dentro, Kim Beals, Scott E. Crouter, Joey C. Eisenmann, Thomas L. McKenzie, Russell R. Pate, Brian E. Saelens, Susan B. Sisson, Donna Spruijt-Metz, Melinda S. Sothern and Peter T. Katzmarzyk

Background:

The National Physical Activity Plan Alliance partnered with physical activity experts to develop a report card that provides a comprehensive assessment of physical activity among United States children and youth.

Methods:

The 2014 U.S. Report Card on Physical Activity for Children and Youth includes 10 indicators: overall physical activity levels, sedentary behaviors, active transportation, organized sport participation, active play, health-related fitness, family and peers, school, community and the built environment, and government strategies and investments. Data from nationally representative surveys were used to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the physical activity indicators. The Committee used the best available data source to grade the indicators using a standard rubric.

Results:

Approximately one-quarter of children and youth 6 to 15 years of age were at least moderately active for 60 min/day on at least 5 days per week. The prevalence was lower among youth compared with younger children, resulting in a grade of D- for overall physical activity levels. Five of the remaining 9 indicators received grades ranging from B- to F, whereas there was insufficient data to grade 4 indicators, highlighting the need for more research in some areas.

Conclusions:

Physical activity levels among U.S. children and youth are low and sedentary behavior is high, suggesting that current infrastructure, policies, programs, and investments in support of children’s physical activity are not sufficient.

Full access

Elva M. Arredondo, Tamar Mendelson, Christina Holub, Nancy Espinoza and Simon Marshall

Context:

The validity of physical activity (PA) self-report measures can be a problem when using these measures with target populations that differ from the population for which the measures were originally developed.

Objectives:

Describe an approach to further tailor PA self-report measures to a target community, and report on focus group and cognitive interview findings.

Process:

Topics relevant to culturally tailoring measures are discussed, including translation, focus groups, and cognitive interviews. We describe examples from our own work, including focus groups and cognitive interviews conducted to assess Latinos’ interpretations of PA questions derived from various epidemiological surveys that were developed in White communities.

Findings:

Findings from focus groups and cognitive interviews provide valuable information about the comprehension, interpretation, and cultural relevance of the PA questions to Latino communities.

Conclusions:

It is recommended that investigators collect formative data to better assess the equivalence of items being applied to a different cultural group. Guidelines for cultural attunement of self-report instruments are described to promote more uniform and rigorous processes of adaptation and facilitate cross-cultural investigations.

Full access

Jesus Soares, Jacqueline N. Epping, Chantelle J. Owens, David R. Brown, Tina J. Lankford, Eduardo J. Simoes and Carl J. Caspersen

Background:

We aimed to determine the likelihood that adult dog owners who walk their dogs will achieve a healthy level of moderate-intensity (MI) physical activity (PA), defined as at least 150 mins/wk.

Methods:

We conducted a systematic search of 6 databases with data from 1990–2012 on dog owners’ PA, to identify those who achieved MIPA. To compare dog-walkers’ performance with non-dog walkers, we used a random effects model to estimate the unadjusted odds ratio (OR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results:

We retrieved 9 studies that met our inclusion criterion and allowed OR calculations. These yielded data on 6980 dog owners aged 18 to 81 years (41% men). Among them, 4463 (63.9%) walked their dogs. Based on total weekly PA, 2710 (60.7%) dog walkers, and 950 (37.7%) non-dog walkers achieved at least MIPA. The estimated OR was 2.74 (95% CI 2.09–3.60).

Conclusion:

Across 9 published studies, almost 2 in 3 dog owners reported walking their dogs, and the walkers are more than 2.5 times more likely to achieve at least MIPA. These findings suggest that dog walking may be a viable strategy for dog owners to help achieve levels of PA that may enhance their health.