Combining GPS, GIS, and accelerometry to explore the physical activity and environment relationship in children and young people - a review

Abstract

The environment has long been associated with physical activity engagement, and recent developments in technology have resulted in the ability to objectively quantify activity behaviours and activity context. This paper reviews studies that have combined Global Positioning Systems (GPS), Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and accelerometry to investigate the PA-environment relationship in children and young people (5–18 years old). Literature searches of the following bibliographic databases were undertaken: Sportdiscus, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Psychinfo and Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA). Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria, and covered topics including greenspace use, general land use, active travel, and the built environment. Studies were largely cross-sectional and took place across developed countries (UK, USA, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia). Findings suggest that roads and streets, school grounds, and the home location are important locations for total PA, and moderate to vigorous PA (MVPA). The relationship between greenspace was positive, however, multiple definitions and outcome measures add complexity to the results. MVPA was more likely in those exposed to higher levels of greenspace compared to sedentary individuals. Total MVPA time in greenspace is low, but when framed as a proportion of the total can be quite high. Domestic gardens may be an important area for higher intensity activity.Researchers are encouraged to show transparency in their methods. As a relatively new area of research, with ever-evolving technology, future work is best placed in developing novel, but robust, methods to investigate the PA and environment relationship. Further descriptive work is encouraged to build on a small but increasing knowledge base; however, longitudinal studies incorporating seasonal/weather variation would also be extremely beneficial to elicit some of the nuances associated with land use. A greater understanding of geographic variation (i.e. within and between countries), as well as urban/suburban and rural dwelling is welcomed, and future work should also include the investigation of psycho-social health as an outcome, as well as differences in socio-economic status, sex and adiposity.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12966-014-0093-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Physical Activity, Residential Environment, and Nature Relatedness in Young Men—A Population-Based MOPO Study

“…These phenomena could become a larger public health issue [18]. It is known that adolescents spend little time in green space [19]. Weakening nature relatedness among members of the younger generation makes them less likely to make use of nature’s health benefits.…”

The Need for Local, Multidisciplinary Collaborations to Promote Advances in Physical Activity Research and Policy Change: The Creation of the Boston Physical Activity Resource Collaborative (BPARC)

“…Accelerometers are also being combined with other technologies, such as global position system (GPS) receivers to measure and contextualize PA [22]. There remains no consensus or standardized approach to measuring physical activity using any of these modalities [23,24,25]. Without greater efforts at standardization, the field will become increasingly complicated as technology rapidly marches on.…”

“Spatial Energetics”

“…Advances in accelerometry, GPS, and GIS provide data to examine the relationship between location and physical activity objectively at precise spatiotemporal scales, 11 and have resulted in a rapid increase in evidence supporting the important role of contextual factors. 12–16 These technologies allow researchers to ask what types of activities at certain times, in specific locations, for various types of people matter for health outcomes. These data can be used, for instance, to test the influence of new infrastructure to affect behavior change 17,18 ; to evaluate characteristics of locations that provide opportunities for physical activity 19,20 ; or to create personalized metrics of air pollution exposure based on location and respiratory rate.…”