Skip to Main Content

An official website of the United States government

Use of previous-day recalls of physical activity and sedentary behavior in epidemiologic studies: results from four instruments

Principal Investigator
Name
Charles Matthews
Degrees
PhD
Institution
NCI / DCEG / Metabolic Epidemiology Branch
Position Title
Senior Investigator
Email
About this CDAS Project
Study
IDATA (Learn more about this study)
Project ID
IDATA-25
Initial CDAS Request Approval
Aug 21, 2018
Title
Use of previous-day recalls of physical activity and sedentary behavior in epidemiologic studies: results from four instruments
Summary
There has been a renewed interest in use-of-time recalls in epidemiological studies, driven by a focus on the 24-hour day [including sleep, sitting, and light physical activity (LPA)] rather than just moderate-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). We propose to examine descriptive data from four different computerised use-of-time instruments, including, the Physical Activity Recall (Welk, 2014), the Multimedia Activity Recall for Children and Adults (Gomersall, 2011), the Computer-based 24-Hour Physical Activity Recall (Kohler, 2017), and Activities Completed Over Time in 24-Hours (ACT24).

For this study, we propose to utilize ACT24 previous-day recall data, which consists of up to 6 recalls collected over 12-months (one recall every other month) and participant demographic information.

Using ACT24 data we will describe participant characteristics and the amount of time reported overall in each of the main time-use categories, and for time spent in sleep (in-bed), physical activity and sedentary behavior. The broad time-use categories will include: personal care, paid work, household chores/caring, transportation, and leisure-time. We will describe the sedentary and physical active time and energy expenditure by activity intensity and time-use categories.
Aims

The primary goal of this project is to illustrate the methods and present descriptive results for these instruments recall instruments rather than to make explicit quantitative comparisons between the populations in which the tools were administered. Additionally, help identify areas for possible methodological improvements in the future we will also describe the similarities and differences between instruments and their scoring methods.

Collaborators

Pedro Saint Maurice, PhD - DCEG/NCI
David Berrigan, PhD - DCCPS/NCI
Pedro Saint-Maurice, PhD – DCEG/NCI
Sjaan R Gomersall, PhD - University of Queensland, Brisbane, AU
Youngwon Kim, PhD - University of Utah, Salt Lake City, USA
Michael F. Leitzmann, MD, ScD - University of Regensburg, Regensburg, DE
Beate Fischer, PhD - University of Regensburg, Regensburg, DE
Andrea Hillreiner, PhD - University of Regensburg, Regensburg, DE
Timothy S. Olds, PhD - University of South Australia, Adelaide, AU
Gregory J. Welk, PhD - Iowa State University, Ames, USA