Objective measurement of physical activity outcomes in lifestyle interventions among adults: A systematic review
Name:
Publisher version
View Source
Access full-text PDFOpen Access
View Source
Check access options
Check access options
Authors
Silfee, Valerie J.Haughton, Christina
Jake-Schoffman, Danielle E.
López-Cepero, Andrea A
May, Christine N.
Sreedhara, Meera
Rosal, Milagros C
Lemon, Stephenie C
UMass Chan Affiliations
Prevention Research CenterDivision of Preventive and Behavioral Medicine, Department of Medicine
Document Type
Journal ArticlePublication Date
2018-09-01Keywords
AccelerometryInterventions
Pedometer
Physical activity
Systematic review/meta-analysis
UMCCTS funding
Community Health and Preventive Medicine
Epidemiology
Equipment and Supplies
Exercise Science
Health Information Technology
Preventive Medicine
Translational Medical Research
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Valid, reliable, and direct measures of physical activity (PA) are critical to assessing the impact of lifestyle PA interventions. However, little is known about the extent to which objective measures have been used to assess the outcomes of lifestyle PA interventions. This systematic review had two aims: 1) evaluate the extent to which PA is measured objectively in lifestyle PA interventions targeting adults and 2) explore and summarize what objective measures have been used and what PA dimensions and metrics have been reported. Pubmed, Cochrane Central Register, and PsychInfo were searched for lifestyle PA interventions conducted between 2006 and 2016. Of the 342 articles that met the inclusion criteria, 239 studies measured PA via subjective measures and 103 studies measured PA via objective measures. The proportion of studies using objective measures increased from 4.4% to 70.6% from 2006 to 2016. All studies measuring PA objectively utilized wearable devices; half (50.5%) used pedometers only and 40.8% used accelerometers only. A majority of the 103 studies reported steps (73.8%) as their PA metric. Incorporating objective measures of PA should continue to be a priority in PA research. More work is needed to address the challenges of comprehensive and consistent collecting, reporting, and analyzing of PA metrics.Source
Prev Med Rep. 2018 Sept;11:74-80. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2018.05.003. eCollection 2018 Sep. Link to article on publisher's site
DOI
10.1016/j.pmedr.2018.05.003Permanent Link to this Item
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/50318PubMed ID
29984142Related Resources
Rights
© 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY-NC-ND/4.0/).Distribution License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1016/j.pmedr.2018.05.003
Scopus Count
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY-NC-ND/4.0/).