Correlates of the Adherence to a 24-hr Wrist-Worn Accelerometer Protocol in a Sample of High School Students

M. Lopes, B. Costa, L. Malheiros, R. Costa, Ana C. F. Souza, I. Crochemore-Silva, K. Silva
{"title":"Correlates of the Adherence to a 24-hr Wrist-Worn Accelerometer Protocol in a Sample of High School Students","authors":"M. Lopes, B. Costa, L. Malheiros, R. Costa, Ana C. F. Souza, I. Crochemore-Silva, K. Silva","doi":"10.1123/jmpb.2020-0062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study (a) compared accelerometer wear time and compliance between distinct wrist-worn accelerometer data collection plans, (b) analyzed participants’ perception of using accelerometers, and (c) identified sociodemographic and behavioral correlates of accelerometer compliance. A sample of high school students (n = 143) wore accelerometers attached to the wrist by a disposable polyvinyl chloride (PVC) wristband or a reusable fabric wristband for 24 hr over 6 days. Those who wore the reusable fabric band, but not their peers, were instructed to remove the device during water-based activities. Participants answered a questionnaire about sociodemographic and behavioral characteristics and reported their experience wearing the accelerometer. We computed non-wear time and checked participants’ compliance with wear-time criteria (i.e., at least three valid weekdays and one valid weekend day) considering two valid day definitions separately (i.e., at least 16 and 23 hours of accelerometer data). Participants who wore a disposable band had greater compliance compared with those who wore a reusable band for both 16-hr (93% vs. 76%, respectively) and 23-hr valid day definitions (91% vs. 50%, respectively). High schoolers with the following characteristics were less likely to comply with wear time criteria if they (a) engaged in labor-intensive activities, (b) perceived that wearing the monitor hindered their daily activities, or (c) felt ashamed while wearing the accelerometer. In conclusion, the data collection plan composed of using disposable wristbands and not removing the monitor resulted in greater 24-hr accelerometer wear time and compliance. However, a negative experience in using the accelerometer may be a barrier to high schoolers’ adherence to rigorous protocols.","PeriodicalId":73572,"journal":{"name":"Journal for the measurement of physical behaviour","volume":"89 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for the measurement of physical behaviour","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/jmpb.2020-0062","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This study (a) compared accelerometer wear time and compliance between distinct wrist-worn accelerometer data collection plans, (b) analyzed participants’ perception of using accelerometers, and (c) identified sociodemographic and behavioral correlates of accelerometer compliance. A sample of high school students (n = 143) wore accelerometers attached to the wrist by a disposable polyvinyl chloride (PVC) wristband or a reusable fabric wristband for 24 hr over 6 days. Those who wore the reusable fabric band, but not their peers, were instructed to remove the device during water-based activities. Participants answered a questionnaire about sociodemographic and behavioral characteristics and reported their experience wearing the accelerometer. We computed non-wear time and checked participants’ compliance with wear-time criteria (i.e., at least three valid weekdays and one valid weekend day) considering two valid day definitions separately (i.e., at least 16 and 23 hours of accelerometer data). Participants who wore a disposable band had greater compliance compared with those who wore a reusable band for both 16-hr (93% vs. 76%, respectively) and 23-hr valid day definitions (91% vs. 50%, respectively). High schoolers with the following characteristics were less likely to comply with wear time criteria if they (a) engaged in labor-intensive activities, (b) perceived that wearing the monitor hindered their daily activities, or (c) felt ashamed while wearing the accelerometer. In conclusion, the data collection plan composed of using disposable wristbands and not removing the monitor resulted in greater 24-hr accelerometer wear time and compliance. However, a negative experience in using the accelerometer may be a barrier to high schoolers’ adherence to rigorous protocols.
高中生24小时腕带加速度计方案依从性的相关因素
本研究(a)比较了不同腕式加速度计数据收集计划之间的加速度计佩戴时间和依从性,(b)分析了参与者对使用加速度计的感知,(c)确定了加速度计依从性的社会人口统计学和行为相关性。一组高中生(143人)在6天的时间里,用一次性聚氯乙烯(PVC)腕带或可重复使用的织物腕带在手腕上佩戴加速度计24小时。那些戴着可重复使用的织物手环的人,而不是他们的同龄人,被要求在水上活动时摘下手环。参与者回答了一份关于社会人口统计和行为特征的问卷,并报告了他们佩戴加速度计的经历。我们计算非磨损时间,并检查参与者是否符合磨损时间标准(即,至少三个有效工作日和一个有效周末),分别考虑两个有效日定义(即,至少16和23小时的加速度计数据)。佩戴一次性手环的参与者比佩戴可重复使用手环的参与者在16小时(分别为93%和76%)和23小时有效日定义(分别为91%和50%)内的依从性更高。具有以下特征的高中生如果(a)从事劳动密集型活动,(b)认为佩戴监视器妨碍了他们的日常活动,或(c)在佩戴加速度计时感到羞耻,则不太可能遵守佩戴时间标准。综上所述,使用一次性腕带和不取下监测器的数据收集计划可以延长加速度计的24小时佩戴时间和依从性。然而,使用加速计的负面体验可能会成为高中生遵守严格协议的障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信