Development of methods to objectively identify time spent using active and motorised modes of travel to work: how do self-reported measures compare?

International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

David Ogilvie¹  Andy Jones²  Alice Dalton²  Silvia Costa¹  Jenna Panter¹ 

[1] UKCRC Centre for Diet and Activity Research (CEDAR), School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK;Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK

关键词: Transport;    Cycling;    Walking;    Convergent validity;    GPS;    Heart rate monitoring;    Physical activity;   

Others  :  1136194
DOI  :  10.1186/s12966-014-0116-x

 received in 2014-04-16, accepted in 2014-09-08,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Active commuting may make an important contribution to population health. Accurate measures of these behaviours are required, but it is unknown how self-reported estimates compare to those derived from objective measures. We sought to develop methods for objectively deriving time spent in specific travel behaviours from a combination of locational and activity data, and to assess the convergent validity of two self-reported estimates.

Methods

In 2010 and 2011, a sub-sample of participants from the Commuting and Health in Cambridge study concurrently completed objective monitoring using combined heart rate and movement sensors and global positioning system devices and reported their past-week commuting in a questionnaire (modes used, and usual time spent walking and cycling per trip) and in a day-by-day diary (all modes and durations). Automated and manual approaches were used to objectively identify total time spent using active and motorised modes. Agreement between self-reported and objectively-derived times was assessed using Lin’s concordance coefficients, Bland-Altman plots and signed-rank tests.

Results

Compared to objective assessments, day-by-day diary estimates of time spent using active modes on the commute were overestimated by a mean of 1.1 minutes/trip (95% limits of agreement (LOA): −7.7 to 9.9, p < 0.001). The magnitude of overestimation was slightly larger, but not significant (p = 0.247), when walking or cycling was used alone (mean: 2.4 minutes/trip, 95% LOA: −6.8 to 11.5). Total time spent on the commute was overestimated by a mean of 1.9 minutes/trip (95% LOA: −15.3 to 19.0, p < 0.001). The mean differences between self-reported usual time and objective estimates were −1.1 minutes/trip (95% LOA: −8.7 to 6.4) for cycling and +2.4 minutes/trip (95% LOA: −10.9 to 15.7) for walking. Mean differences between usual and daily estimates of time were <1 minute/trip for both walking and cycling.

Conclusions

We developed a novel method of combining objective data to identify time spent using active and motorised modes, and total time spent commuting. Compared to objectively-derived times, self-reported times spent active commuting were slightly overestimated with wide LOA, suggesting that they should be used with caution to infer aggregate weekly quantities of activity on the commute at the individual level.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Panter et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Sallis JF, Cervero RB, Ascher W, Henderson KA, Kraft MK, Kerr J: An ecological approach to creating active living comunities. Annu Rev Public Health 2006, 27:297-322.
• [2]Janz KF: Physical activity in epidemiology: moving from questionnaire to objective measurement. Br J Sports Med 2006, 40:191-192.
• [3]Prince S, Adamo K, Hamel M, Hardt J, Gorber S, Tremblay M: A comparison of direct versus self-report measures for assessing physical activity in adults: a systematic review. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2008, 5:56. BioMed Central Full Text
• [4]Besson H, Brage S, Jakes RW, Ekelund U, Wareham NJ: Estimating physical activity energy expenditure, sedentary time, and physical activity intensity by self-report in adults. Am J Clin Nutr 2010, 91:106-114.
• [5]Hagstromer M, Oja P, Sjostrom M: The International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ): a study of concurrent and construct validity. Public Health Nutr 2006, 9:755-762.
• [6]Heinen E, Maat K: Are longitudinal data unavoidable? Measuring variation in bicycle mode choice. Transportation Res Rec 2012, 2314:72-80.
• [7]Primerano F, Taylor MP, Pitaksringkarn L, Tisato P: Defining and understanding trip chaining behaviour. Transportation 2008, 35:55-72.
• [8]Rissel C, Curac N, Greenaway M, Bauman A: Physical activity associated with public transport Use—a review and modelling of potential benefits. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2012, 9:2454-2478.
• [9]Panter J, Desousa C, Ogilvie D: Incorporating walking or cycling into car journeys to and from work: the role of individual, workplace and environmental characteristics. Prev Med 2013, 56:211-217.
• [10]Shephard RJ: Is active commuting the answer to population health? Sports Med 2008, 38:751-758.
• [11]Kelly P, Krenn P, Titze SPS, Foster C: Quantifying the difference between self-reported and global positioning systems-measured journey durations: a systematic review. Transp Rev 2013, 33:443-459.
• [12]Kelly P, Doherty A, Berry E, Hodges S, Batterham A, Foster C: Can we use digital life-log images to investigate active and sedentary travel behaviour? Results from a pilot study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2011, 8:44. BioMed Central Full Text
• [13]Allen A: Dredging up the past: lifelogging, memory, and surveillance. University of Chicago Law Rev 2008, 75:47-74.
• [14]van Hees VT, Golubic R, Ekelund U, Brage S: Impact of study design on development and evaluation of an activity-type classifier. J Appl Physiol 2013, 114:1042-1051.
• [15]Maddison R, Ni Mhurchu C: Global positioning system: a new opportunity in physical activity measurement. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2009, 6:73. BioMed Central Full Text
• [16]Krenn PJ, Titze S, Oja P, Jones A, Ogilvie D: Use of global positioning systems to study physical activity and the environment: a systematic review. Am J Prev Med 2011, 41:508-515.
• [17]Troped PJ, Oliveira MS, Matthews CE, Cromley EK, Melly SJ, Craig BA: Prediction of activity mode with global positioning system and accelerometer data. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2008, 40:972-978.
• [18]Audrey S, Procter S, Cooper A: The contribution of walking to work to adult physical activity levels: a cross sectional study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2014, 11:37. BioMed Central Full Text
• [19]Kang B, Moudon AV, Hurvitz PM, Reichley L, Saelens BE: Walking objectively measured: classifying accelerometer data with GPS and travel diaries. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2013, 45:1419-1428.
• [20]Rodriguez DA, Cho GH, Elder JP, Conway TL, Evenson KR, Ghosh-Dastidar B, Shay E, Cohen D, Veblen-Mortenson S, Pickrell J, Lytle L: Identifying walking trips from GPS and accelerometer data in adolescent females. J Phys Act Health 2012, 9:421-431.
• [21]Brage S, Brage N, Franks PW, Ekelund U, Wareham NJ: Reliability and validity of the combined heart rate and movement sensor Actiheart. Eur J Clin Nutr 2005, 59:561-570.
• [22]Ogilvie D, Griffin S, Jones A, Mackett R, Guell C, Panter J, Jones N, Cohn S, Yang L, Chapman C: Commuting and health in Cambridge: a study of a 'natural experiment' in the provision of new transport infrastructure. BMC Public Health 2010, 10:703. BioMed Central Full Text
• [23]Panter J, Griffin S, Jones A, Mackett R, Ogilvie D: Correlates of walking and cycling to work: baseline results from the Commuting and Health in Cambridge study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2011, 8:124. BioMed Central Full Text
• [24]Yang L, Griffin S, Chapman C, Ogilvie D: The feasibility of rapid baseline objective physical activity measurement in a natural experimental study of a commuting population. BMC Public Health 2012, 12:841. BioMed Central Full Text
• [25]Panter J, Griffin S, Ogilvie D: Correlates of reported and recorded time spent in physical activity: results from the Commuting and Health in Cambridge study. PLoS One 2012, 7:e42202.
• [26]Yang L, Panter J, Griffin S, Ogilvie D: Associations between active commuting and physical activity in working adults: cross-sectional results from the commuting and health in Cambridge study. Prev Med 2012, 55:453-457.
• [27]Brage S, Ekelund U, Brage N, Hennings MA, Froberg K, Franks PW, Wareham NJ: Hierarchy of individual calibration levels for heart rate and accelerometry to measure physical activity. J Appl Physiol 2007, 103:682-692.
• [28]Evenson KR, Wen F, Hillier A, Cohen DA: Assessing the contribution of parks to physical activity using global positioning system and accelerometry. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2013, 45:1981-1987.
• [29]O'Connor TM, Cerin E, Robles J, Lee RE, Kerr J, Butte N, Mendoza JA, Thompson D, Baranowski T: Feasibility study to objectively assess activity and location of Hispanic preschoolers: a short communication. Geospat Health 2013, 7:375-380.
• [30]Shannon T, Giles-Corti B, Pikora T, Bulsara M, Shilton T, Bull F: Active commuting in a university setting: assessing commuting habits and potential for modal change. Transp Policy 2006, 13:240-253.
• [31]Stratford N, Simmonds N, Nicolaas G, Costigan P: National travel survey. Department for Transport, London; 2003.
• [32]Klinker C, Schipperijn J, Christian H, Kerr J, Ersboll A, Troelsen J: Using accelerometers and global positioning system devices to assess gender and age differences in children's school, transport, leisure and home based physical activity. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2014, 11:8. BioMed Central Full Text
• [33]Newson R: Confidence intervals for rank statistics: somers’ D and extensions. Stata J 2006, 6:309-334.
• [34]Lin L: A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics 1989, 45:255-268.
• [35]Lin L: A note on the concordance correlation coefficient. Biometrics 2000, 56:324-325.
• [36]McBride G: A proposal for strength-of-agreement criteria for Lin's Concordance Correlation Coefficient. 2005.
• [37]Bland M, Altman D: Statistical method for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986, 327:307-310.
• [38]Deriving and validating trip purposes and travel modes for multi-day GPS-based travel surveys: a large-scale application in the Netherlands Transport Res Part C Emerg Technol 2009, 17:285-297.
• [39]Hensher D, Button K, Haynes K, Stopher P: Handbook of transport geography and spatial systems. Elsevier, Oxford; 2008.
• [40]Hutcheon J, Chiolero A, Hanley J: Random measurement error and regression dilution bias. Br Med J 2010, 340:1402-1406.
• [41]Ogilvie D, Foster C, Rothnie H, Cavill N, Hamilton V, Fitzsimons C, Mutrie N: Interventions to promote walking: systematic review. Br Med J 2007, 334:1204-1207.