Home Current Issue Previous Issues Published Ahead-of-Print Collections For Authors Journal Info
Skip Navigation LinksHome > March 2004 - Volume 36 - Issue 3 > Youth Recall and TriTrac Accelerometer Estimates of Physical...
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise:
APPLIED SCIENCES: Physical Fitness and Performance

Youth Recall and TriTrac Accelerometer Estimates of Physical Activity Levels

CRADOCK, ANGIE L.1; WIECHA, JEAN L.1; PETERSON, KAREN E.1 3; SOBOL, ARTHUR M.1; COLDITZ, GRAHAM A.2; GORTMAKER, STEVEN L.1

Collapse Box

Abstract

CRADOCK, A. L., J. L. WIECHA, K. E. PETERSON, A. M. SOBOL, G. A. COLDITZ, and S. L. GORTMAKER. Youth Recall and TriTrac Accelerometer Estimates of Physical Activity Levels. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc., Vol. 36, No. 3, pp. 525–532, 2004.

Purpose: To examine significance of missing data and describe physical activity patterns using recall and accelerometer measures among youth in a nonlaboratory setting.

Methods: Fifty-four middle-school students wore TriTrac-R3D monitors (TTM) and completed an interviewer-prompted 24-h recall during two, 5-d monitoring sessions. We coded 2860 30-min recall intervals to a standard MET compendium. Complete TTM data were gathered for 43 students. Ordinal multinomial models tested for bias in TTM estimates of activity levels due to: 1) exclusion of subjects with incomplete TTM data, and 2) exclusion of intervals within days due to missing TTM data.

Results: Students with complete monitor data had an average 12.5 ± 0.9 monitored hours per day over 5.5 ± 2.1 d. Compared with students with incomplete monitoring data, they reported similar proportions of recall 30-min intervals at sedentary (68% vs 69%), light (14% vs 15%), moderate (11% vs 10%), and vigorous (7% vs 6%) intensity levels (P = 0.63). The proportion of recall intervals (within days) with and without simultaneous monitoring data did not differ by activity intensity (P = 0.64) across sedentary (69% vs 67%), light (14% vs 12%), moderate (11% vs 10%), and vigorous (6% vs 9%) categories. Recalls overestimated percent time per day in moderate and vigorous activity relative to TTM (22.8% vs 8.9%, P < 0.0001). Boys reported higher percent of time than girls in vigorous activity (10.9% vs 3.9%, P < 0.05). Girls reported more time than boys (9.5% vs 6.4%, P < 0.05) in light activities. No significant sex differences were observed using TTM.

Conclusions: Missing TTM data did not bias estimates of activity levels. Self-reported activity measures overestimated moderate and vigorous activity relative to the TTM and varied by sex.

©2004The American College of Sports Medicine

Login

Article Tools

Share

Search for Similar Articles
You may search for similar articles that contain these same keywords or you may modify the keyword list to augment your search.

Connect With Us