Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorKongsvold, Atle Austnes
dc.contributor.authorFlaaten, Mats
dc.contributor.authorLogacjov, Aleksej
dc.contributor.authorSkarpsno, Eivind Schjelderup
dc.contributor.authorBach, Kerstin
dc.contributor.authorNilsen, Tom Ivar Lund
dc.contributor.authorMork, Paul Jarle
dc.date.accessioned2024-01-15T10:29:22Z
dc.date.available2024-01-15T10:29:22Z
dc.date.created2023-12-18T08:51:46Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.identifier.issn1479-5868
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/3111481
dc.description.abstractBackground Despite apparent shortcomings such as measurement error and low precision, self-reported sedentary time is still widely used in surveillance and research. The aim of this study was threefold; (i) to examine the agreement between self-reported and device-measured sitting time in a general adult population; (ii), to examine to what extent demographics, lifestyle factors, long-term health conditions, physical work demands, and educational level is associated with measurement bias; and (iii), to explore whether correcting for factors associated with bias improves the prediction of device-measured sitting time based on self-reported sitting time. Methods A statistical validation model study based on data from 23 993 adults in the Trøndelag Health Study (HUNT4), Norway. Participants reported usual sitting time on weekdays using a single-item questionnaire and wore two AX3 tri-axial accelerometers on the thigh and low back for an average of 3.8 (standard deviation [SD] 0.7, range 1–5) weekdays to determine their sitting time. Statistical validation was performed by iteratively adding all possible combinations of factors associated with bias between self-reported and device-measured sitting time in a multivariate linear regression. We randomly selected 2/3 of the data (n = 15 995) for model development and used the remaining 1/3 (n = 7 998) to evaluate the model. Results Mean (SD) self-reported and device-measured sitting time were 6.8 (2.9) h/day and 8.6 (2.2) h/day, respectively, corresponding to a mean difference of 1.8 (3.1) h/day. Limits of agreement ranged from − 8.0 h/day to 4.4 h/day. The discrepancy between the measurements was characterized by a proportional bias with participants device-measured to sit less overestimating their sitting time and participants device-measured to sit more underestimating their sitting time. The crude explained variance of device-measured sitting time based on self-reported sitting time was 10%. This improved to 24% when adding age, body mass index and physical work demands to the model. Adding sex, lifestyle factors, educational level, and long-term health conditions to the model did not improve the explained variance. Conclusions Self-reported sitting time had low validity and including a range of factors associated with bias in self-reported sitting time only marginally improved the prediction of device-measured sitting time.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherBioMed Central Ltd.en_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleCan the bias of self-reported sitting time be corrected? A statistical model validation study based on data from 23 993 adults in the Norwegian HUNT studyen_US
dc.title.alternativeCan the bias of self-reported sitting time be corrected? A statistical model validation study based on data from 23 993 adults in the Norwegian HUNT studyen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.source.volume20en_US
dc.source.journalInternational Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activityen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12966-023-01541-y
dc.identifier.cristin2214607
dc.source.articlenumber139en_US
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode2


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal