↓ Skip to main content

New insights into discrepancies between self-reported and accelerometer-measured moderate to vigorous physical activity among women – the mPED trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
8 news outlets
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
New insights into discrepancies between self-reported and accelerometer-measured moderate to vigorous physical activity among women – the mPED trial
Published in
BMC Public Health, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3348-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yoshimi Fukuoka, William Haskell, Eric Vittinghoff

Abstract

The aims of this report were 1) to describe the duration of moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) and the proportion of participants meeting the recommended criterion of at least 150 min of MVPA per week as measured by the 7 Day Physical Activity Recall Questionnaire (7D-PAR) and accelerometer among women who were enrolled in the mPED trial; 2) to assess the level of agreement of the two measures using a Bland-Altman plot; and 3) to describe the positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV, respectively) of meeting the guidelines by calculating the percentage of women meeting the physical activity recommendation by the 7D-PAR who also met this recommendation based on data from the accelerometer. Baseline data on duration of MVPA from the mPED trial were analyzed for 215 women. Among the women who met the recommended criterion by the 7D-PAR (self-report), we calculated the proportion of individuals who also met it by the accelerometer (objective measure). A Bland Altman Plot was used to assess concordance between the two measures. The mean age was 52.4 (±11.2) years; 54.4 % were white; and 48.8 % were single or divorced. While median MVPA was 160 min/week by the 7D-PAR, it was only 24 min/week in the accelerometer. A total of 117 women met the 150-min criterion by the 7D-PAR. Of these, only 18 also met the criterion by the objective measure (PPV 15.4 %, 95 % CI 9.4-23.2 %). Among the 98 women who did not meet the criterion by the 7D-PAR, none met it by the accelerometer (NPV 100 %). A Bland Altman plot showed the mean difference of +145 min between the two measures with a 95 % limit of agreement at + 471 to -181 min. The large discrepancy between the self-reported and objective measures of MVPA meeting the 150-min criterion suggests that self-reported physical activity measures should be used with caution in intervention studies. While our data suggest that self-report could be used to identify a physically inactive sample, it would be likely to over-estimate the proportions of women who become active in one or both arms of trials of interventions promoting MVPA. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01280812.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 66 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 18%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Researcher 5 7%
Student > Master 5 7%
Professor 4 6%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 19 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 13%
Sports and Recreations 9 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 12%
Psychology 5 7%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 22 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 67. 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 19 January 2021.
All research outputs
#537,493
of 22,882,389 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#503
of 14,924 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,965
of 355,869 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#16
of 387 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,882,389 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,924 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
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 355,869 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 387 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.