Cargando…

Content and quality of physical activity ontologies: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION: Ontologies are a formal way to represent knowledge in a particular field and have the potential to transform the field of health promotion and digital interventions. However, few researchers in physical activity (PA) are familiar with ontologies, and the field can be difficult to navig...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Braun, Maya, Carlier, Stéphanie, De Backere, Femke, De Paepe, Annick, Van De Velde, Marie, Van Dyck, Delfien, Marques, Marta M., De Turck, Filip, Crombez, Geert
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10009987/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36907890
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12966-023-01428-y
_version_ 1784906097759354880
author Braun, Maya
Carlier, Stéphanie
De Backere, Femke
De Paepe, Annick
Van De Velde, Marie
Van Dyck, Delfien
Marques, Marta M.
De Turck, Filip
Crombez, Geert
author_facet Braun, Maya
Carlier, Stéphanie
De Backere, Femke
De Paepe, Annick
Van De Velde, Marie
Van Dyck, Delfien
Marques, Marta M.
De Turck, Filip
Crombez, Geert
author_sort Braun, Maya
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Ontologies are a formal way to represent knowledge in a particular field and have the potential to transform the field of health promotion and digital interventions. However, few researchers in physical activity (PA) are familiar with ontologies, and the field can be difficult to navigate. This systematic review aims to (1) identify ontologies in the field of PA, (2) assess their content and (3) assess their quality. METHODS: Databases were searched for ontologies on PA. Ontologies were included if they described PA or sedentary behavior, and were available in English language. We coded whether ontologies covered the user profile, activity, or context domain. For the assessment of quality, we used 12 criteria informed by the Open Biological and Biomedical Ontology (OBO) Foundry principles of good ontology practice. RESULTS: Twenty-eight ontologies met the inclusion criteria. All ontologies covered PA, and 19 included information on the user profile. Context was covered by 17 ontologies (physical context, n = 12; temporal context, n = 14; social context: n = 5). Ontologies met an average of 4.3 out of 12 quality criteria. No ontology met all quality criteria. DISCUSSION: This review did not identify a single comprehensive ontology of PA that allowed reuse. Nonetheless, several ontologies may serve as a good starting point for the promotion of PA. We provide several recommendations about the identification, evaluation, and adaptation of ontologies for their further development and use. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12966-023-01428-y.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10009987
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100099872023-03-14 Content and quality of physical activity ontologies: a systematic review Braun, Maya Carlier, Stéphanie De Backere, Femke De Paepe, Annick Van De Velde, Marie Van Dyck, Delfien Marques, Marta M. De Turck, Filip Crombez, Geert Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Review INTRODUCTION: Ontologies are a formal way to represent knowledge in a particular field and have the potential to transform the field of health promotion and digital interventions. However, few researchers in physical activity (PA) are familiar with ontologies, and the field can be difficult to navigate. This systematic review aims to (1) identify ontologies in the field of PA, (2) assess their content and (3) assess their quality. METHODS: Databases were searched for ontologies on PA. Ontologies were included if they described PA or sedentary behavior, and were available in English language. We coded whether ontologies covered the user profile, activity, or context domain. For the assessment of quality, we used 12 criteria informed by the Open Biological and Biomedical Ontology (OBO) Foundry principles of good ontology practice. RESULTS: Twenty-eight ontologies met the inclusion criteria. All ontologies covered PA, and 19 included information on the user profile. Context was covered by 17 ontologies (physical context, n = 12; temporal context, n = 14; social context: n = 5). Ontologies met an average of 4.3 out of 12 quality criteria. No ontology met all quality criteria. DISCUSSION: This review did not identify a single comprehensive ontology of PA that allowed reuse. Nonetheless, several ontologies may serve as a good starting point for the promotion of PA. We provide several recommendations about the identification, evaluation, and adaptation of ontologies for their further development and use. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12966-023-01428-y. BioMed Central 2023-03-13 /pmc/articles/PMC10009987/ /pubmed/36907890 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12966-023-01428-y Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Review
Braun, Maya
Carlier, Stéphanie
De Backere, Femke
De Paepe, Annick
Van De Velde, Marie
Van Dyck, Delfien
Marques, Marta M.
De Turck, Filip
Crombez, Geert
Content and quality of physical activity ontologies: a systematic review
title Content and quality of physical activity ontologies: a systematic review
title_full Content and quality of physical activity ontologies: a systematic review
title_fullStr Content and quality of physical activity ontologies: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Content and quality of physical activity ontologies: a systematic review
title_short Content and quality of physical activity ontologies: a systematic review
title_sort content and quality of physical activity ontologies: a systematic review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10009987/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36907890
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12966-023-01428-y
work_keys_str_mv AT braunmaya contentandqualityofphysicalactivityontologiesasystematicreview
AT carlierstephanie contentandqualityofphysicalactivityontologiesasystematicreview
AT debackerefemke contentandqualityofphysicalactivityontologiesasystematicreview
AT depaepeannick contentandqualityofphysicalactivityontologiesasystematicreview
AT vandeveldemarie contentandqualityofphysicalactivityontologiesasystematicreview
AT vandyckdelfien contentandqualityofphysicalactivityontologiesasystematicreview
AT marquesmartam contentandqualityofphysicalactivityontologiesasystematicreview
AT deturckfilip contentandqualityofphysicalactivityontologiesasystematicreview
AT crombezgeert contentandqualityofphysicalactivityontologiesasystematicreview