Comparative analysis of adherence to 24-hour movement guidelines in adolescents: Objective versus subjective measures.

Background and aims: Previous studies have investigated the concordance between objective and subjective measures for assessing physical activity, sedentary behaviour, and sleep duration separately. However, no studies have compared adherence to the 24-h movement guidelines using both objective and subjective measures in adolescents. The aim of this study was to compare adherence to the 24-h movement guidelines using both objective and subjective measures.

Methods and results: A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, EMBASE, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus up to May 2024. A meta-analysis using a random-effects model was conducted, and a p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant of the 5968 studies identified, only 42 met the inclusion criteria, with the included studies reporting a mean age of participants ranging from 11.99 to 17.99 years, comprising a total sample of 856,235 participants. There was no statistically significant difference between objective and self-reported measures of adherence to the 24-h movement guidelines (p > 0.05). When analysing each behaviour separately, there was a statistically significant difference between objective and self-reported measures of physical activity and sleep time (p < 0.05). Regarding sedentary behaviour, all studies used subjective measures; therefore, no meta-analysis was performed for screen time as all studies relied on subjective measures.

Conclusion: Based on these findings, both objective and subjective measures can be used to assess adherence to the 24-h movement guidelines in adolescents. Thus, researchers and policymakers can choose either objective or subjective methods to assess adherence to the 24-h movement guidelines, with decisions tailored to the clinical context.