What does it mean to use the mean? The impact of different data handling strategies on the proportion of children classified as meeting 24-hr movement guidelines and associations with overweight and obesity

BACKGROUND: Despite the widespread endorsement of 24-hour movement guidelines (physical activity, sleep, screentime) for youth, no standardized processes for categorizing guideline achievement exists. The purpose of this study was to illustrate the impact of different data handling strategies on the proportion of children meeting 24-hour movement guidelines (24hrG) and associations with overweight and obesity. METHODS: A subset of 524 children (ages 5–12yrs) with complete 24-hour behavior measures on at least 10 days was used to compare the impact of data handling strategies on estimates of meeting 24hrG. Physical activity and sleep were measured via accelerometry. Screentime was measured via parent self-report. Comparison of meeting 24hrG were made using 1) average of behaviors across all days (AVG-24hr), 2) classifying each day and evaluating the percentage meeting 24hrG from 10–100% of their measured days (DAYS-24hr), and 3) the average of a random sample of 4 days across 10 iterations (RAND-24hr). A second subset of children (N=475) with height and weight data was used to explore the influence of each data handling strategy on children meeting guidelines and the odds of overweight/obesity via logistic regression. RESULTS: Classification for AVG-24hr resulted in 14.7% of participants meeting 24hrG. Classification for DAYS-24hr resulted in 63.5% meeting 24hrG on 10% of measured days with <1% meeting 24hrG on 100% of days. Classification for RAND-24hr resulted in 15.9% of participants meeting 24hrG. Across 10 iterations, 63.6% of participants never met 24hrG regardless of the days sampled, 3.4% always met 24hrG, with the remaining 33.0% classified as meeting 24hrG for at least one of the 10 random iterations of days. Using AVG-24hr as a strategy, meeting all three guidelines associated with lower odds of having overweight obesity (OR=0.38, p<0.05). The RAND-24hr strategy produced a range of odds from 0.27 to 0.56. Using the criteria of needing to meet 24hrG on 100% of days, meeting all three guidelines associated with the lowest odds of having overweight and obesity as well (OR=0.04, p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Varying estimates of meeting the 24hrG and the odds of overweight and obesity results from different data handling strategies and days sampled.