Cargando…
Validity of long-term and short-term recall of occupational sitting time in Finnish and Chinese office workers
BACKGROUND: As sedentary behavior is a global health issue, there is a need for methods of self-reported sitting assessment. The accuracy and reliability of these methods should also be tested in various populations and different cultural contexts. This study examined the validity of long-term and s...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Shanghai University of Sport
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7411120/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32768127 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jshs.2017.06.003 |
_version_ | 1783568308269744128 |
---|---|
author | Gao, Ying Cronin, Neil J. Nevala, Nina Finni, Taija |
author_facet | Gao, Ying Cronin, Neil J. Nevala, Nina Finni, Taija |
author_sort | Gao, Ying |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: As sedentary behavior is a global health issue, there is a need for methods of self-reported sitting assessment. The accuracy and reliability of these methods should also be tested in various populations and different cultural contexts. This study examined the validity of long-term and short-term recall of occupational sitting time in Finnish and Chinese subgroups. METHODS: Two cohort groups of office-based workers (58.6% female, age range 22–67 years) participated: a Finnish group (FIN, n = 34) and a Chinese group (CHI, n = 36). Long-term (past 3-month sitting) and short-term (daily sitting assessed on 5 consecutive days) single-item measures were used to assess self-reported occupational sitting time. Values from each participant were compared to objectively measured occupational sitting time assessed via thigh-mounted accelerometers, with Spearman's rho (ρ) used to assess validity and the Bland-Altman method used to evaluate agreement. Coefficients of variation depicted day-to-day variability of time spent on sitting at work. RESULTS: In the total study sample, the results showed that both long-term and short-term recall correlated with accelerometer-derived sitting time (ρ = 0.532, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.336–0.684, p < 0.001; ρ = 0.533, 95%CI: 0.449–0.607, p < 0.001, respectively). Compared to objectively measured sitting time, self-reported occupational sitting time was 2.4% (95%CI: −0.5% to 5.3%, p = 0.091) and 2.2% (95%CI: 0.7%–3.6%, p = 0.005) greater for long-term and short-term recall, respectively. The agreement level was within the range −21.2% to 25.9% for long-term recall, and −24.2% to 28.5% for short-term recall. During a 5-day work week, day-to-day variation of sitting time was 9.4% ± 11.4% according to short-term recall and 10.4% ± 8.4% according to accelerometry-derived occupational sitting time. CONCLUSION: Overall, both long-term and short-term self-reported instruments provide acceptable measures of occupational sitting time in an office-based workplace, but their utility at the individual level is limited due to large variability. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7411120 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Shanghai University of Sport |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-74111202020-08-12 Validity of long-term and short-term recall of occupational sitting time in Finnish and Chinese office workers Gao, Ying Cronin, Neil J. Nevala, Nina Finni, Taija J Sport Health Sci Regular paper BACKGROUND: As sedentary behavior is a global health issue, there is a need for methods of self-reported sitting assessment. The accuracy and reliability of these methods should also be tested in various populations and different cultural contexts. This study examined the validity of long-term and short-term recall of occupational sitting time in Finnish and Chinese subgroups. METHODS: Two cohort groups of office-based workers (58.6% female, age range 22–67 years) participated: a Finnish group (FIN, n = 34) and a Chinese group (CHI, n = 36). Long-term (past 3-month sitting) and short-term (daily sitting assessed on 5 consecutive days) single-item measures were used to assess self-reported occupational sitting time. Values from each participant were compared to objectively measured occupational sitting time assessed via thigh-mounted accelerometers, with Spearman's rho (ρ) used to assess validity and the Bland-Altman method used to evaluate agreement. Coefficients of variation depicted day-to-day variability of time spent on sitting at work. RESULTS: In the total study sample, the results showed that both long-term and short-term recall correlated with accelerometer-derived sitting time (ρ = 0.532, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.336–0.684, p < 0.001; ρ = 0.533, 95%CI: 0.449–0.607, p < 0.001, respectively). Compared to objectively measured sitting time, self-reported occupational sitting time was 2.4% (95%CI: −0.5% to 5.3%, p = 0.091) and 2.2% (95%CI: 0.7%–3.6%, p = 0.005) greater for long-term and short-term recall, respectively. The agreement level was within the range −21.2% to 25.9% for long-term recall, and −24.2% to 28.5% for short-term recall. During a 5-day work week, day-to-day variation of sitting time was 9.4% ± 11.4% according to short-term recall and 10.4% ± 8.4% according to accelerometry-derived occupational sitting time. CONCLUSION: Overall, both long-term and short-term self-reported instruments provide acceptable measures of occupational sitting time in an office-based workplace, but their utility at the individual level is limited due to large variability. Shanghai University of Sport 2020-07 2017-06-27 /pmc/articles/PMC7411120/ /pubmed/32768127 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jshs.2017.06.003 Text en © 2019 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Shanghai University of Sport. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Regular paper Gao, Ying Cronin, Neil J. Nevala, Nina Finni, Taija Validity of long-term and short-term recall of occupational sitting time in Finnish and Chinese office workers |
title | Validity of long-term and short-term recall of occupational sitting time in Finnish and Chinese office workers |
title_full | Validity of long-term and short-term recall of occupational sitting time in Finnish and Chinese office workers |
title_fullStr | Validity of long-term and short-term recall of occupational sitting time in Finnish and Chinese office workers |
title_full_unstemmed | Validity of long-term and short-term recall of occupational sitting time in Finnish and Chinese office workers |
title_short | Validity of long-term and short-term recall of occupational sitting time in Finnish and Chinese office workers |
title_sort | validity of long-term and short-term recall of occupational sitting time in finnish and chinese office workers |
topic | Regular paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7411120/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32768127 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jshs.2017.06.003 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gaoying validityoflongtermandshorttermrecallofoccupationalsittingtimeinfinnishandchineseofficeworkers AT croninneilj validityoflongtermandshorttermrecallofoccupationalsittingtimeinfinnishandchineseofficeworkers AT nevalanina validityoflongtermandshorttermrecallofoccupationalsittingtimeinfinnishandchineseofficeworkers AT finnitaija validityoflongtermandshorttermrecallofoccupationalsittingtimeinfinnishandchineseofficeworkers |