Ecological Momentary Assessment of Physical Activity: Validation Study
Ecological Momentary Assessment of Physical Activity: Validation Study
复制标题
DOI：
10.2196/jmir.7602
复制
发表时间：
2017-07-01
影响因子：
7.4
通讯作者：
Kendzor, Darla E.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Knell, Gregory;Gabriel, Kelley Pettee;Kendzor, Darla E.
背景：在提供情境时，生态瞬时评估(EMA)可能会引起比传统自我报告方法更不容易产生偏见的体力活动(PA)估计。目的：本研究的目的是检验EMA评估的PA与加速度量法的收敛效度。方法：参与者使用国际体力活动问卷(IPAQ)和行为危险因素监测系统(BRFSS)自我报告他们的PA，并佩戴加速计完成每天的EMA(通过手机发送)，持续7天。每周概要评估包括久坐时间和中等、剧烈和中等至剧烈的体力活动(MVPA)。结果：受试者年龄43.3岁(SD 13.1)，51.7%(123/238)为非裔美国人，74.8%(178/238)超重或肥胖，63.0%(150/238)为低收入者。EMA和传统的自我报告与加速度计估计值之间的线性关系具有统计学意义(P
Background: Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) may elicit physical activity (PA) estimates that are less prone to bias than traditional self-report measures while providing context.Objectives: The objective of this study was to examine the convergent validity of EMA-assessed PA compared with accelerometry.Methods: The participants self-reported their PA using International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) and Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) and wore an accelerometer while completing daily EMAs (delivered through the mobile phone) for 7 days. Weekly summary estimates included sedentary time and moderate-, vigorous-, and moderate- to vigorous- intensity physical activity (MVPA). Spearman coefficients and Lin's concordance correlation coefficients (LCC) examined the linear association and agreement for EMA and the questionnaires as compared with accelerometry.Results: Participants were aged 43.3 (SD 13.1) years, 51.7% (123/238) were African American, 74.8% (178/238) were overweight or obese, and 63.0% (150/238) were low income. The linear associations of EMA and traditional self-reports with accelerometer estimates were statistically significant (P