婴儿俯卧时间问卷和时间使用日记对geneactive加速度计的有效性

IF 1.7 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science Pub Date : 2021-06-20 DOI:10.1080/1091367X.2021.1941033
Zhiguang Zhang, Madison Predy, Nicholas Kuzik, Lyndel Hewitt, K. Hesketh, Lesley Pritchard, A. Okely, V. Carson
{"title":"婴儿俯卧时间问卷和时间使用日记对geneactive加速度计的有效性","authors":"Zhiguang Zhang, Madison Predy, Nicholas Kuzik, Lyndel Hewitt, K. Hesketh, Lesley Pritchard, A. Okely, V. Carson","doi":"10.1080/1091367X.2021.1941033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study examined the concurrent validity of a tummy time questionnaire and time-use diary against an accelerometer measure. Participants were 29 parents and their 6-month-old infants from the Early Movers project in Edmonton, Canada. Tummy time was concurrently measured using a parental questionnaire, a time-use diary, and a validated GENEActiv accelerometer. In participants with data on all measures (n = 26), relative (Spearman’s rank correlations) and absolute (Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and Bland–Altman plots) concurrent validity were examined. The questionnaire (rs = 0.60) and time-use diary (rs = 0.80) tummy time measures were significantly correlated with the accelerometer measure, with large effect sizes (r > 0.50). Compared to the accelerometer measure of tummy time, a significant difference in mean rank was observed for the questionnaire measure but not for the time-use diary measure. Bland–Altman plots showed a significant mean difference in tummy time between the accelerometer and questionnaire measures (42 min/d; 95% limits of agreement: −73,157 min/d) but not between the accelerometer and time-use diary measures (2 min/d; 95% limits of agreement: −47,51 min/d). These preliminary findings indicate both subjective measures may be appropriate for infant studies examining associations with tummy time and/or comparing tummy time between samples. The time-use diary may also provide a relatively precise estimate of tummy time in prevalence studies.","PeriodicalId":48577,"journal":{"name":"Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science","volume":"26 1","pages":"27 - 38"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1091367X.2021.1941033","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validity of an Infant Tummy Time Questionnaire and Time-use Diary against the GENEActiv Accelerometer\",\"authors\":\"Zhiguang Zhang, Madison Predy, Nicholas Kuzik, Lyndel Hewitt, K. Hesketh, Lesley Pritchard, A. Okely, V. Carson\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1091367X.2021.1941033\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This study examined the concurrent validity of a tummy time questionnaire and time-use diary against an accelerometer measure. Participants were 29 parents and their 6-month-old infants from the Early Movers project in Edmonton, Canada. Tummy time was concurrently measured using a parental questionnaire, a time-use diary, and a validated GENEActiv accelerometer. In participants with data on all measures (n = 26), relative (Spearman’s rank correlations) and absolute (Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and Bland–Altman plots) concurrent validity were examined. The questionnaire (rs = 0.60) and time-use diary (rs = 0.80) tummy time measures were significantly correlated with the accelerometer measure, with large effect sizes (r > 0.50). Compared to the accelerometer measure of tummy time, a significant difference in mean rank was observed for the questionnaire measure but not for the time-use diary measure. Bland–Altman plots showed a significant mean difference in tummy time between the accelerometer and questionnaire measures (42 min/d; 95% limits of agreement: −73,157 min/d) but not between the accelerometer and time-use diary measures (2 min/d; 95% limits of agreement: −47,51 min/d). These preliminary findings indicate both subjective measures may be appropriate for infant studies examining associations with tummy time and/or comparing tummy time between samples. The time-use diary may also provide a relatively precise estimate of tummy time in prevalence studies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48577,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"27 - 38\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1091367X.2021.1941033\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1091367X.2021.1941033\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1091367X.2021.1941033","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

本研究考察了俯卧时间问卷和时间使用日记对加速度计测量的并发效度。参与者是加拿大埃德蒙顿的29对父母和他们6个月大的婴儿。同时使用父母问卷、时间使用日记和经过验证的geneactive加速计来测量俯卧时间。在具有所有测量数据的参与者中(n = 26),对相对(Spearman秩相关)和绝对(Wilcoxon符号秩检验和Bland-Altman图)并发效度进行检验。问卷调查(rs = 0.60)和时间使用日记(rs = 0.80)的俯卧时间测量值与加速度计测量值显著相关,且效应量较大(r = 0.50)。与俯卧时间的加速度计测量相比,问卷测量的平均排名有显著差异,但时间使用日记测量的平均排名没有显著差异。Bland-Altman图显示加速度计和问卷测量之间的俯卧时间平均差异显著(42分钟/天;95%的一致性限制:−73,157分钟/天),但加速度计和时间使用日记测量(2分钟/天;95%一致性限:−47.51 min/d)。这些初步研究结果表明,这两种主观测量方法可能适用于婴儿研究,检查俯卧时间与样本之间的联系和/或比较俯卧时间。时间使用日记也可以在流行研究中提供相对精确的俯卧时间估计。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Validity of an Infant Tummy Time Questionnaire and Time-use Diary against the GENEActiv Accelerometer
ABSTRACT This study examined the concurrent validity of a tummy time questionnaire and time-use diary against an accelerometer measure. Participants were 29 parents and their 6-month-old infants from the Early Movers project in Edmonton, Canada. Tummy time was concurrently measured using a parental questionnaire, a time-use diary, and a validated GENEActiv accelerometer. In participants with data on all measures (n = 26), relative (Spearman’s rank correlations) and absolute (Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and Bland–Altman plots) concurrent validity were examined. The questionnaire (rs = 0.60) and time-use diary (rs = 0.80) tummy time measures were significantly correlated with the accelerometer measure, with large effect sizes (r > 0.50). Compared to the accelerometer measure of tummy time, a significant difference in mean rank was observed for the questionnaire measure but not for the time-use diary measure. Bland–Altman plots showed a significant mean difference in tummy time between the accelerometer and questionnaire measures (42 min/d; 95% limits of agreement: −73,157 min/d) but not between the accelerometer and time-use diary measures (2 min/d; 95% limits of agreement: −47,51 min/d). These preliminary findings indicate both subjective measures may be appropriate for infant studies examining associations with tummy time and/or comparing tummy time between samples. The time-use diary may also provide a relatively precise estimate of tummy time in prevalence studies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science
Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
33.30%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: The scope of Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science (MPEES) covers original measurement research, special issues, and tutorials within six substantive disciplines of physical education and exercise science. Six of the seven sections of MPEES define the substantive disciplines within the purview of the original research to be published in the journal: Exercise Science, Physical Activity, Physical Education Pedagogy, Psychology, Research Methodology and Statistics, and Sport Management and Administration. The seventh section of MPEES, Tutorial and Teacher’s Toolbox, serves to provide an outlet for review and/or didactic manuscripts to be published in the journal. Special issues provide an avenue for a coherent set of manuscripts (e.g., four to five) to collectively focus in-depth on an important and timely measurement-related issue within the scope of MPEES. The primary aim of MPEES is to publish high-impact manuscripts, most of which will focus on original research, that fit within the scope of the journal.
期刊最新文献
Development, Validation, and Reliability of the System for Observing Teaching Competencies in Physical Education (SOTC-PE) Weekly Perceived Exertion is More Sensitive to Detecting Variations in Training Load in Runners Than TRIMP or Running Distance Exploring Students’ Perceived Constraints Support in Physical Education: Measurement Development and Learning Outcomes Direct and Indirect Causal Effects of an Individual Randomized Physical Activity-Promoting Intervention: A Substantive-Methodological Synergy Predictive Validity of Lower Extremity Muscle Strength, Strength Asymmetry, and Soccer-Specific Fitness for Talent Identification in Elite Male Youth Soccer Players: A Retrospective Cohort Study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1