Device-Based Measurement of Office-Based Physical Activity and Sedentary Time: A Systematic Review

Author:

Bongers Noah1,Healy Genevieve N.1ORCID,Thomas George1ORCID,Clark Bronwyn K.1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. School of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to systematically review the findings for validity, reliability, and acceptability of device-based measures of office-based physical activity and/or sedentary time in an office context to evaluate workplace interventions. Methods: The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Analysis guidelines. Five electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Web of Science) were searched (inception to December 2023). Keywords included population (e.g., workers), type of measure (e.g., device-based), measurement constructs (e.g., validity), context (e.g., office), and behavior (e.g., sitting). Two authors screened titles, abstracts, and full texts independently with disagreements resolved by a third author. Findings were reported using narrative synthesis, and COnsensus-based standards for the Selection of health status Measurement INstruments was used for quality assessment. Results: In total, 2,299 articles were identified, with 16 articles retained. These reported 21 measurement protocols (nine in free-living settings) assessing eight worn, four remote, and one combined method. Sixteen protocols assessed office sitting, with standing (n = 8), moving (n = 11), postural transitions (n = 7), and location (n = 2) also assessed. Participant sample sizes ranged from one to 42 (median = 13). Criterion validity was assessed in all 21 protocols, with lower limb–worn measures of sitting, and worn and remote measures of location reporting the highest validity/accuracy compared with the ground truth (good to excellent). Only two articles reported acceptability (good acceptability), with none reporting reliability. Conclusions: There is evidence of valid device-based measures of office behavior (particularly sitting and location of workers), but this has largely been obtained in laboratory settings and/or with small samples. Larger studies in more varied free-living settings, potentially using multiples sources of data and assessing acceptability, are required.

Publisher

Human Kinetics

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3