Physical activity promotes mobility and independence ( Pahor et al., 2014 ), helps to prevent and manage a variety of chronic diseases ( Lee et al., 2012 ), reduces the risk of falls and related injuries ( Gillespie et al., 2012 ), and enhances physical, mental, and social health ( Bauman, Merom
Dawn C. Mackey, Alexander D. Perkins, Kaitlin Hong Tai, Joanie Sims-Gould and Heather A. McKay
Kelley K. Pettee Gabriel, James R. Morrow Jr. and Anne-Lorraine T. Woolsey
The selection of the most psychometrically appropriate self-report tool(s) to measure specific physical activity constructs has been a challenge for researchers, public health practitioners, and clinicians, alike. The lack of a reasonable gold standard measure and inconsistent use of established and evolving terminology have contributed to these challenges. The variation of self-report measures and quality of the derived summary estimates could be attributed to the absence of a standardized conceptual framework for physical activity.
To present a conceptual framework for physical activity as a complex and multidimensional behavior that differentiates behavioral and physiological constructs of human movement.
The development of a conceptual framework can provide the basic foundation from which to standardize definitions, guide design and development of self-report measures, and provide consistency during instrument selection.
Based on our proposed conceptual framework for physical activity, we suggest that physical activity is more clearly defined as the behavior that involves human movement, resulting in physiological attributes including increased energy expenditure and improved physical fitness. Utilization of the proposed conceptual framework can result in better instrument choices and consistency in methods used to assess physical activity and sedentary behaviors across research and public health practice.
Eric Tsz-Chun Poon, John O’Reilly, Sinead Sheridan, Michelle Mingjing Cai and Stephen Heung-Sang Wong
used validated instruments to quantify the overall bone-specific loading nature of various physical activities (PAs) among jockeys. Recent studies examining bone health in jockeys have also assessed endocrine function. It is hypothesized that suboptimal bone density is attributed to the disruption of
Richard P. Troiano, Kelley K. Pettee Gabriel, Gregory J. Welk, Neville Owen and Barbara Sternfeld
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.
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.
After participation in a workshop breakout session, coauthors summarized the ideas presented and reached consensus on the material presented here.
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.
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
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
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
Emily Budzynski-Seymour, Rebecca Conway, Matthew Wade, Alex Lucas, Michelle Jones, Steve Mann and James Steele
Sufficient physical activity (PA) is well accepted as a means of improving health and preventing noncommunicable disease conditions. 1 , 2 In addition, PA has been argued to be a means to enhance various aspects of emotional health and produce psychological benefits. 3 A key element of health
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.