↓ Skip to main content

Systematic Review of Childhood Sedentary Behavior Questionnaires: What do We Know and What is Next?

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
196 Mendeley
Title
Systematic Review of Childhood Sedentary Behavior Questionnaires: What do We Know and What is Next?
Published in
Sports Medicine, August 2016
DOI 10.1007/s40279-016-0610-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lisan M. Hidding, Teatske M. Altenburg, Lidwine B. Mokkink, Caroline B. Terwee, Mai J. M. Chinapaw

Abstract

Accurate measurement of child sedentary behavior is necessary for monitoring trends, examining health effects, and evaluating the effectiveness of interventions. We therefore aimed to summarize studies examining the measurement properties of self-report or proxy-report sedentary behavior questionnaires for children and adolescents under the age of 18 years. Additionally, we provided an overview of the characteristics of the evaluated questionnaires. We performed systematic literature searches in the EMBASE, PubMed, and SPORTDiscus electronic databases. Studies had to report on at least one measurement property of a questionnaire assessing sedentary behavior. Questionnaire data were extracted using a standardized checklist, i.e. the Quality Assessment of Physical Activity Questionnaire (QAPAQ) checklist, and the methodological quality of the included studies was rated using a standardized tool, i.e. the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. Forty-six studies on 46 questionnaires met our inclusion criteria, of which 33 examined test-retest reliability, nine examined measurement error, two examined internal consistency, 22 examined construct validity, eight examined content validity, and two examined structural validity. The majority of the included studies were of fair or poor methodological quality. Of the studies with at least a fair methodological quality, six scored positive on test-retest reliability, and two scored positive on construct validity. None of the questionnaires included in this review were considered as both valid and reliable. High-quality studies on the most promising questionnaires are required, with more attention to the content validity of the questionnaires. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42016035963.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 196 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 196 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 15%
Student > Bachelor 25 13%
Researcher 19 10%
Other 14 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 7%
Other 41 21%
Unknown 54 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 39 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 25 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 12%
Social Sciences 11 6%
Psychology 9 5%
Other 22 11%
Unknown 67 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 October 2018.
All research outputs
#2,383,989
of 25,366,663 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#1,507
of 2,905 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,849
of 346,607 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#32
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,366,663 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,905 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 56.1. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 346,607 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.