|Appears in Collections:||Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport Journal Articles|
|Peer Review Status:||Refereed|
|Title:||Responsiveness of device-based and self-report measures of physical activity to detect behavior change in men taking part in the Football Fans in Training (FFIT) program|
|Keywords:||physical activity measurement|
|Citation:||Donnachie C, Kelly P, Mutrie N, Hunt K & Gill J (2020) Responsiveness of device-based and self-report measures of physical activity to detect behaviour change in men taking part in the Football Fans in Training (FFIT) program. Journal for the Measurement of Physical Behaviour, 3 (1), pp. 67-77. https://doi.org/10.1123/jmpb.2019-0018|
|Abstract:||The capacity of physical activity (PA) measures to detect changes in PA within interventions is crucial. This is the first study to examine responsiveness of activPAL3™ and the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ; Short Form) in detecting PA change during a 12 week group-based, men-only weight management programme - Football Fans in Training (FFIT). Participants wore an activPAL3™ and completed the IPAQ pre- and post-programme (n=30). Relationships between change scores were assessed by Spearman’s correlations. Mean or median changes in PA were measured using paired samples t-tests and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Responsiveness to change was assessed utilising Standardised Response Mean (SRM). Both device-based and self-report measures demonstrated significant changes pre-post intervention, although these changes were not significantly correlated. The SRM values for changes in activPAL3™ metrics were: 0.54 (MET-mins/day); 0.53 (step counts/day); and 0.44 (MVPA/day), indicating a small to medium responsiveness to change. SRM values for changes in IPAQ scores were: 0.59 (total PA mins/day); 0.54 (total MET-mins/day); 0.59 (walking MET-mins/day); 0.38 (vigorous MET-mins/day); and 0.38 (moderate MET-mins/day), revealing a small to medium responsiveness to change. These findings reveal that two commonly used device-based and self-report measures demonstrated responsiveness to changes in PA. While inclusion of both device-based and self-report measures is desirable within interventions it is not always feasible. The results from this study support that self-reported measures can detect PA change within behavioural interventions, although may have a tendency to overestimate changes, compared with device-based measures.|
|Rights:||Accepted author manuscript version reprinted, by permission, from Journal for the Measurement of Physical Behaviour, 2020 https://doi.org/10.1123/jmpb.2019-0018. © Human Kinetics, Inc.|
|Donnachie 2019 Final draft as submitted JMPB_Responsiveness_Revised_October_2019.pdf||Fulltext - Accepted Version||917.46 kB||Adobe PDF||View/Open|
This item is protected by original copyright
Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.