IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i23p12774-d694675.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validity of Domain-Specific Sedentary Time Using Accelerometer and Questionnaire with activPAL Criterion

Author

Listed:
  • Rina So

    (Ergonomics Research Group, National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Kawasaki 214-8585, Japan
    Research Center for Overwork-Related Disorders, National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Kawasaki 214-8585, Japan)

  • Tomoaki Matsuo

    (Ergonomics Research Group, National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Kawasaki 214-8585, Japan
    Research Center for Overwork-Related Disorders, National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Kawasaki 214-8585, Japan)

Abstract

Accelerometers based on the cut-point method are generally the most used in sedentary time (ST) research. However, mixed cut-points are an issue, so an accelerometer based on metabolic equivalents (METs) could be used as an alternative. This study aimed to validate a METs-based accelerometer (HJA-750C, OMRON) and a questionnaire that estimates domain-specific sedentary time measures using activPAL as a criterion value. We also examined whether measurement validity differed according to gender and occupation. We used data from 242 workers in the validation study. Participants wore activPAL on the thigh and OMRON on the waist for seven consecutive days with daily recording logs. The Workers Living Activity-time Questionnaire (WLAQ) was administered once. The domain-specific ST assessed quantities of ST during commuting, working time, non-working time on a workday, and non-workday. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and Spearman’s rho coefficients were then used to conduct analyses. The OMRON accelerometer showed acceptable values ( r = 0.67–0.86 and ICC of 0.63–0.87) in the overall domain-specific ST. Additionally, each measurement result suggested that working time is the most accurate domain to measure ST (ICC of 0.87 for OMRON and 0.68 for WLAQ). Moreover, there were no differences in the overall validity of the results according to gender and occupation. The METs-based accelerometer has acceptable validity for ST measurements to be used among workers. Additionally, working time may be the preferred domain for the accurate assessment of ST in both objective and subjective measurements. These results can advance the quality of the sedentary research field.

Suggested Citation

  • Rina So & Tomoaki Matsuo, 2021. "Validity of Domain-Specific Sedentary Time Using Accelerometer and Questionnaire with activPAL Criterion," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-11, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:23:p:12774-:d:694675
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/23/12774/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/23/12774/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shohei Yano & Mohammad Javad Koohsari & Ai Shibata & Kaori Ishii & Levi Frehlich & Gavin R. McCormack & Koichiro Oka, 2019. "Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior Assessment: A Laboratory-Based Evaluation of Agreement between Commonly Used ActiGraph and Omron Accelerometers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-13, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Eduardo Rossato de Victo & Mauro Fisberg & Dirceu Solé & Irina Kovalskys & Georgina Gómez & Attilio Rigotti & Lilia Yadira Cortes & Martha Cecilia Yépez-Garcia & Rossina Pareja & Marianella Herrera-Cu, 2023. "Joint Association between Sedentary Time and Moderate-to-Vigorous Physical Activity with Obesity Risk in Adults from Latin America," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(8), pages 1-13, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:23:p:12774-:d:694675. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.