Cargando…

Evaluating the Feasibility of Measuring Travel to School Using a Wearable Camera

BACKGROUND: The school journey is often studied in relation to health outcomes in children and adolescents. Self-report is the most common measurement tool. PURPOSE: To investigate the error on self-reported journey duration in adolescents, using a wearable digital camera (Microsoft SenseCam). METHO...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kelly, Paul, Doherty, Aiden R., Hamilton, Alex, Matthews, Anne, Batterham, Alan M., Nelson, Michael, Foster, Charlie, Cowburn, Gill
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier Science 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3474949/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23079179
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2012.07.027
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The school journey is often studied in relation to health outcomes in children and adolescents. Self-report is the most common measurement tool. PURPOSE: To investigate the error on self-reported journey duration in adolescents, using a wearable digital camera (Microsoft SenseCam). METHODS: During March–May 2011, participants (n=17; aged 13–15 years) from four schools wore wearable cameras to and from school for 1 week. The device automatically records time-stamped, first-person point-of-view images, without any action from the wearer. Participants also completed a researcher-administered self-report travel survey over the same period. Analysis took place in November 2011. Within- and between-subjects correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement were derived, accounting for the multiple observations per individual. RESULTS: Self-report data were collected for 150 journey stages and SenseCam data for 135 (90%) of these. The within-subjects correlation coefficient for journey duration was 0.89 (95% CI=0.84, 0.93). The between-subjects correlation coefficient was 0.92 (95% CI=0.79, 0.97). The mean difference (bias) between methods at the whole sample level was small (10 seconds per journey, 95% CI= −33, 53). The wide limits of agreement (±501 seconds, 95% CI= −491, 511) reveal large random error. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to direct observation from images, self-reported journey duration is accurate at the mean group level but imprecise at the level of the individual participant.