Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
7.3
Journals
IJERPH
Special Issues
Measuring Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior for the Next Decade:...
ijerph-logo
Submit to IJERPH Review for IJERPH Propose a Special Issue

Journal Menu

► Journal Menu

Journal Browser

► Journal Browser
share announcement

Measuring Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior for the Next Decade: What Does the Future Hold?

A special issue of International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (ISSN 1660-4601). This special issue belongs to the section "Public Health Statistics and Risk Assessment".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (30 April 2022) | Viewed by 25625

Special Issue Editors

Prof. Dr. Alexis Le Faucheur

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Sport sciences and physical education department, Ecole normale supérieure de Rennes, Campus de Ker Lann, 35170 Bruz, France
Interests: exercise physiology; physical activity and energy expenditure measurement; wearable monitors; accelerometry; global positioning system; peripheral artery disease; intermittent claudication
Prof. Scott Duncan

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Human Potential Centre, School of Sport and Recreation, Auckland University of Technology, Private Bag 92006, Auckland 1142, New Zealand
Interests: Physical activity and sedentary behaviour assessment, risk and play in children, environmental determinants of health and wellbeing, quantitative research design and analysis
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals
Prof. Dr. Alan Donnelly

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences / Health Research Institute, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland
Interests: Physical behaviors and their influence on health, particularly how time spent standing, sitting and in physical activity impact health risk in different populations. The validity and reliability of accelerometers to measure time spent in the different physical behaviours.

Special Issue Information

The use of wearable monitors for tracking health and fitness is becoming increasingly prevalent in modern life. In the last decade, we have seen a rapid increase in the number of commercially available wearable monitors, leaving the impression that almost everything is measurable at any time. The same period has also seen a proliferation of research relating to the use of wearable monitors to measure physical activity and sedentary behavior. The next generation of sensor and data science technologies provides unprecedented possibilities for assessing free-living human movement, but we need to ensure that what we choose to measure is relevant and accurate. This is of particular importance for public health, where the use of wearable monitors in the context of mHealth holds real potential for enhancing future health systems (WHO, 2011).
In this Special Issue entitled “Measuring Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior for the Next Decade: What Does the Future Hold?”, we invite you to share your work relating to the measurement of physical activity (PA) and sedentary (SED) behaviors in the context of health. Particular emphasis will be placed on the following topics:

1) Is my standard really a gold standard? The issue of the reference measures for assessing PA and SED behavior in the real-life context.
2) PA and SED behavior recognition and classification in the context of real-life: facts and flaws.
3) The demise of the activity count? Raw data in the new era of accelerometry.
4) From uni- to multi-modal assessment PA and SED behavior.
5) Scaling up the use of PA and SED behaviors assessment using wearable monitors in epidemiological research.
6) New approaches in clinical populations: moving from physical activity to physical (functional) capacity assessment.

Manuscripts that offer innovative and future-focused perspectives on these research areas will be prioritized. Review articles will be invited by the editorial team; however, authors interested in submitting an unsolicited review should first contact the Guest Editor to outline their potential topic prior to submission.

Prof. Scott Duncan
Prof. Alexis Le Faucheur
Prof. Dr. Alan Donnelly
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2500 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • wearable monitors
  • validity
  • reliability
  • accelerometry
  • GPS
  • heart rate
  • steps
  • physical activity classification
  • physical activity guidelines and epidemiology
  • sedentary behavior
  • health
  • chronic conditions

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue polices can be found here.

Published Papers (5 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Other

13 pages, 905 KiB  
Article
Physical Activity Behaviour and Comparison of GPAQ and Travel Diary Transport-Related Physical Activity in Accra, Ghana
by Lambed Tatah, Matthew Pearce, Rahul Goel, Soren Brage, James Woodcock and Fidelia A. A. Dake
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19(12), 7346; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19127346 - 15 Jun 2022
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2186
Abstract
There is a lack of data on physical activity (PA), active travel, and the comparison of measurement instruments in low-resource settings. The objective of this paper is to describe PA behaviour and the agreement of walking estimates from the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire [...] Read more.
There is a lack of data on physical activity (PA), active travel, and the comparison of measurement instruments in low-resource settings. The objective of this paper is to describe PA behaviour and the agreement of walking estimates from the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ) and the travel diary in a low-resource setting. We used a cross-sectional survey design to capture data from the residents of Accra (Ghana) between May 2020 and March 2021. Of the 863 participants aged 15+ years, 65% were females, and 86% reported PA. The median weekly PA was 18 (interquartile range: 5–75) metabolic equivalent of task hours, with 50% of females and 37% of males achieving low PA levels. In the GPAQ, 80% of participants reported weekly walking; the mean number of days walked was 3.8 (standard deviation (SD): 2.5); hence, 54% of participants reported walking on any day, and the mean daily walking duration was 51 (SD: 82) minutes. In the diary, 56% of participants reported walking for over 24 h, with a mean walking duration of 31 (SD: 65) minutes. The correlation of walking duration between instruments was weak (rho: 0.31; 95% Confidence Interval: 0.25–0.37); the mean bias was 20 min, with GPAQ estimates being 0.1 to 9 times higher than diary estimates. We concluded that low PA is prevalent in Accra, and while the travel diary and GPAQ estimate similar walking prevalence, their walking duration agreement is poor. We recommend accompanying PA questionnaires with objective measures for calibration. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Measuring Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior for the Next Decade: What Does the Future Hold?)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 1539 KiB  
Article
How Accurate and Precise Can We Measure the Posture and the Energy Expenditure Component of Sedentary Behaviour with One Sensor?
by Roman P. Kuster, Wilhelmus J. A. Grooten, Victoria Blom, Daniel Baumgartner, Maria Hagströmer and Örjan Ekblom
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18(11), 5782; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18115782 - 27 May 2021
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 4175
Abstract
Sedentary behaviour is an emergent public health topic, but there is still no method to simultaneously measure both components of sedentary behaviour—posture and energy expenditure—with one sensor. This study investigated the accuracy and precision of measuring sedentary time when combining the proprietary processing [...] Read more.
Sedentary behaviour is an emergent public health topic, but there is still no method to simultaneously measure both components of sedentary behaviour—posture and energy expenditure—with one sensor. This study investigated the accuracy and precision of measuring sedentary time when combining the proprietary processing of a posture sensor (activPAL) with a new energy expenditure algorithm and the proprietary processing of a movement sensor (ActiGraph) with a published posture algorithm. One hundred office workers wore both sensors for an average of 7 days. The activPAL algorithm development used 38 and the subsequent independent method comparison 62 participants. The single sensor sedentary estimates were compared with Bland–Atman statistics to the Posture and Physical Activity Index, a combined measurement with both sensors. All single-sensor methods overestimated sedentary time. However, adding the algorithms reduced the overestimation from 129 to 21 (activPAL) and from 84 to 7 min a day (ActiGraph), with far narrower 95% limits of agreements. Thus, combining the proprietary data with the algorithms is an easy way to increase the accuracy and precision of the single sensor sedentary estimates and leads to sedentary estimates that are more precise at the individual level than those of the proprietary processing are at the group level. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Measuring Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior for the Next Decade: What Does the Future Hold?)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 1597 KiB  
Article
Influence of the Duration and Timing of Data Collection on Accelerometer-Measured Physical Activity, Sedentary Time and Associated Insulin Resistance
by Tanja Sjöros, Henri Vähä-Ypyä, Saara Laine, Taru Garthwaite, Eliisa Löyttyniemi, Harri Sievänen, Kari K. Kalliokoski, Juhani Knuuti, Tommi Vasankari and Ilkka H. A. Heinonen
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18(9), 4950; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18094950 - 6 May 2021
Cited by 5 | Viewed by 3208
Abstract
Accelerometry is a commonly used method to determine physical activity in clinical studies, but the duration and timing of measurement have seldom been addressed. We aimed to evaluate possible changes in the measured outcomes and associations with insulin resistance during four weeks of [...] Read more.
Accelerometry is a commonly used method to determine physical activity in clinical studies, but the duration and timing of measurement have seldom been addressed. We aimed to evaluate possible changes in the measured outcomes and associations with insulin resistance during four weeks of accelerometry data collection. This study included 143 participants (median age of 59 (IQR9) years; mean BMI of 30.7 (SD4) kg/m2; 41 men). Sedentary and standing time, breaks in sedentary time, and different intensities of physical activity were measured with hip-worn accelerometers. Differences in the accelerometer-based results between weeks 1, 2, 3 and 4 were analyzed by mixed models, differences during winter and summer by two-way ANOVA, and the associations between insulin resistance and cumulative means of accelerometer results during weeks 1 to 4 by linear models. Mean accelerometry duration was 24 (SD3) days. Sedentary time decreased after three weeks of measurement. More physical activity was measured during summer compared to winter. The associations between insulin resistance and sedentary behavior and light physical activity were non-significant after the first week of measurement, but the associations turned significant in two to three weeks. If the purpose of data collection is to reveal associations between accelerometer-measured outcomes and tenuous health outcomes, such as insulin sensitivity, data collection for at least three weeks may be needed. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Measuring Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior for the Next Decade: What Does the Future Hold?)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 2053 KiB  
Article
Is Sitting Always Inactive and Standing Always Active? A Simultaneous Free-Living activPal and ActiGraph Analysis
by Roman P. Kuster, Wilhelmus J. A. Grooten, Victoria Blom, Daniel Baumgartner, Maria Hagströmer and Örjan Ekblom
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(23), 8864; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17238864 - 28 Nov 2020
Cited by 11 | Viewed by 5095
Abstract
Sedentary Behavior (SB), defined as sitting with minimal physical activity, is an emergent public health topic. However, the measurement of SB considers either posture (e.g., activPal) or physical activity (e.g., ActiGraph), and thus neglects either active sitting or inactive standing. The aim of [...] Read more.
Sedentary Behavior (SB), defined as sitting with minimal physical activity, is an emergent public health topic. However, the measurement of SB considers either posture (e.g., activPal) or physical activity (e.g., ActiGraph), and thus neglects either active sitting or inactive standing. The aim of this study was to determine the true amount of active sitting and inactive standing in daily life, and to analyze by how much these behaviors falsify the single sensors’ sedentary estimates. Sedentary time of 100 office workers estimated with activPal and ActiGraph was therefore compared with Bland-Altman statistics to a combined sensor analysis, the posture and physical activity index (POPAI). POPAI classified each activPal sitting and standing event into inactive or active using the ActiGraph counts. Participants spent 45.0% [32.2%–59.1%] of the waking hours inactive sitting (equal to SB), 13.7% [7.8%–21.6%] active sitting, and 12.0% [5.7%–24.1%] inactive standing (mean [5th–95th percentile]). The activPal overestimated sedentary time by 30.3% [12.3%–48.4%] and the ActiGraph by 22.5% [3.2%–41.8%] (bias [95% limit-of-agreement]). The results showed that sitting is not always inactive, and standing is not always active. Caution should therefore be paid when interpreting the activPal (ignoring active sitting) and ActiGraph (ignoring inactive standing) measured time as SB. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Measuring Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior for the Next Decade: What Does the Future Hold?)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Other

Jump to: Research

17 pages, 3077 KiB  
Systematic Review
Validity and Reliability of IPAQ-SF and GPAQ for Assessing Sedentary Behaviour in Adults in the European Union: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
by Kaja Meh, Gregor Jurak, Maroje Sorić, Paulo Rocha and Vedrana Sember
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18(9), 4602; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18094602 - 26 Apr 2021
Cited by 47 | Viewed by 9649
Abstract
Current lifestyles are marked by sedentary behaviour; thus, it is of great importance for policymaking to have valid and reliable tools to measure sedentary behaviour in order to combat it. Therefore, the aim of this review and meta-analysis is to critically review, assess, [...] Read more.
Current lifestyles are marked by sedentary behaviour; thus, it is of great importance for policymaking to have valid and reliable tools to measure sedentary behaviour in order to combat it. Therefore, the aim of this review and meta-analysis is to critically review, assess, and compile the reliability, criterion validity, and construct validity of the single-item sedentary behaviour questions within national language versions of most commonly used international physical activity questionnaires for adults in the European Union: The International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Short Form and the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire. A total of 1749 records were screened, 287 full-text papers were read, and 14 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The results and quality of studies were evaluated by the Quality Assessment of Physical Activity Questionnaires checklist. Meta-analysis indicated moderate to high reliability (rw = 0.59) and concurrent validity (rw = 0.55) of national language versions of single-item sedentary behaviour questions. Criterion validity was rather low (rw = 0.23) but in concordance with previous studies. The risk of bias analysis highlighted the poor reporting of methods and results, with a total bias score of 0.42. Thus, we recommend using multi-item SB questionnaires and smart trackers for providing information on SB rather than single-item sedentary behaviour questions in physical activity questionnaires. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Measuring Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior for the Next Decade: What Does the Future Hold?)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-5
Back to TopTop