Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine the validity of a computerized 24-hour physical activity recall instrument (24PAR). METHODS: Participants (n=20) wore 2 pattern-recognition activity monitors (an IDEEA and a SenseWear Pro Armband) for a 24-hour period and then completed the 24PAR the following morning. Participants completed 2 trials, 1 while maintaining a prospective diary of their activities and 1 without a diary. The trials were counterbalanced and completed within a week from each other. Estimates of energy expenditure (EE) and minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) were compared with the criterion measures using 3-way (method by gender by trial) mixed-model ANOVA analyses. RESULTS: For EE, pairwise correlations were high (r>.88), and there were no differences in estimates across methods. Estimates of MVPA were more variable, but correlations were still in the moderate to high range (r>.57). Average activity levels were significantly higher on the logging trial, but there was no significant difference in the accuracy of self-report on days with and without logging. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study support the overall utility of the 24PAR for group-level estimates of daily EE and MVPA.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Calabro et al. (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: