Abstract
Citation
McMurray RG, Harrell JS, Bradley CB, Webb JP, Goodman EM. Comparison of a computerized physical activity recall with a triaxial motion sensor in middle-school youth. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1998 Aug;30(8):1238-45.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To develop and test a computerized activity recall (CAR) for capturing activity and energy expenditure (EE) in youth and to further our understanding of the use of the three-dimensional accelerometer (Tritrac) for studying activity and EE. METHODS: Forty-five students (25 girls and 20 boys) in grade 6-8, completed 5 consecutive days of the CAR and were randomly assigned to wear the Tritrac during 1 day in which they also completed the CAR. Twenty-two subjects also repeated 5 d of the CAR and 1 d of Tritrac monitoring 1-2 wk later. RESULTS: The correlation between CAR and Tritrac for total EE was significant (r = 0.510, P = 0.0003). However, the total EE computed from the Tritrac was significantly greater than the CAR (1941 +/- 273 kcal vs 1576 +/- 343 kcal (8.14 +/- 1.14 vs 6.60 +/- 1.44 MJ); P < 0.001). The EE of activities was similar for the Tritrac and CAR, approximately 670 kcal (2.80 MJ), suggesting that the difference between the two methods was their estimates of resting EE. Comparison of the CAR and Tritrac for classifying active and inactive subjects indicated that both methods similarly classified 35 of the 45 subjects or 78% (P = 0.0038). Although significant, the Kappa statistic (kappa = 0.398) indicated a low-level of agreement between methods. The Tritrac indicated 50.4 +/- 29.2 min.d-1 of activities of > or = 3 METs, whereas the CAR indicated 76.7 +/- 71.9 min.d-1 (P = 0.02). The week 1 vs 2 test-retest correlation was 0.0485 (P = 0.022) for the Tritrac and 0.820 (P = 0.0001) for the CAR. CONCLUSIONS: It appears that both methods have acceptable reliability. However, the validity of each method to measure total and activity EE remains unclear, as the Tritrac appears to overestimate resting energy expenditure, whereas the CAR overestimates total minutes of activity.
Full Text
The full text is available at https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00005768-199808000-00009
At A Glance
Individual Physical Activity Behavior Variables
| Expenditure |
|---|
| Total Energy |
| Sedentary Activity |
| Total Physical Activity/Physical Activity Level |
Domain(s)
Individual Physical Activity Behavior
Measure Type
Questionnaire
Electronic monitor (e.g., accelerometer, pedometer, heart rate)
Measure Availability
Not reported
Number of Items
Not applicable
Study location
Metro/Urban
NC, USA
a single year-round middle school
Languages
Not applicable
Information about Development of Measure
Nothing to add
Study Design
Study Participants
Age
6 - 11 Years
12 - 18 Years
Sex
Female
Male
Race/Ethnicity
White
Black/African American
Non-white
Predominantly Low-income/Low-SES
No
Sample Size
45
Study Design
Design Type
Validation/Reliability
Health Outcomes Assessed
None
Obesity Measures
Not applicable
BMI Measured or Self-reported
Not applicable
Covariates
Not reported
Data Reported on Race/Ethnicity
Quantitative data on study sample
Data Reported on SES
Not applicable
SES-related Variables
Not applicable
How To Use
Administration
Who Administered
Self-administered
Researcher-administered
How Administered
Direct observation, PC/PDA/GPS unit
Time Required
Not reported
Training Required
Not reported
Instructions on Use
Not reported
Data Analysis
Data Collection/Analysis Costs
Not available
Data Collection/Protocol
Not available
Instructions on Data Analysis
Not reported
Validity (0)
There are no validity tests reported for this measure.
Reliability (3)
| Type of reliability | Construct/subscale assessed | Test/statistic used | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Test-retest | See paper | ||
| Test-retest | CAR total energy expenditure | Intraclass correlation | 0.947 |
| Test-retest | CAR activity energy expenditure | Intraclass correlation | 0.820 |