Is self-reported time spent sedentary and in physical activity differentially biased by age, gender,
                    body mass index, and low-back pain?

Gupta, Nidhi; Heiden, Marina; Mathiassen, Svend Erik; Holtermann, Andreas

doi:10.5271/sjweh.3693

Cited by 31 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The bias related to self-reported occupational physical activity may be differential and may lead to an overestimation of the association between selfreported OPA and MSP. Gupta et al (Gupta et al 2018) reported that the extent of overestimating self-reported physical activity time depended on the level of musculoskeletal pain. Those with a high level of musculoskeletal pain overestimated their physical activity to a higher extent than those with a low level of musculoskeletal pain.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Objectively measured versus self-reported occupational physical activity and multisite musculoskeletal pain: a prospective follow-up study at 20 nursing homes in Denmark

Neupane

Karstad

Hallman

et al. 2019

Int Arch Occup Environ Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To explore the prospective association of objectively measured and self-reported occupational physical activity (OPA) with multisite musculoskeletal pain (MSP) among Danish eldercare workers. Methods The study population consisted of eldercare workers in 20 Danish nursing homes (N = 553, response rate 59%, 525 female). Baseline data were collected in 2013-2014 and the 1-year follow-up was completed in 2016. At baseline, we measured objective OPA by a thigh-worn ActiGraph GT3X + accelerometer during work and self-reported OPA by a questionnaire survey. Information on musculoskeletal pain during the past four weeks in seven different body sites was reported by a structured questionnaire at baseline (n = 389) and by SMS and telephone interview during follow-up (n = 284). MSP was defined as having pain in two or more body sites. Using log-binomial models we calculated risk ratios (RRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to estimate the association between objectively measured and self-reported OPA and MSP. Results We found statistically significant positive associations between self-reported OPA (RR for high OPA 1.24, 95% CI 1.05-1.46) and MSP while there was no significant association found between objective OPA and MSP. Conclusion Our study indicates that self-reported, but not objectively measured OPA is positively associated with MSP. This finding highlights the need for better understanding, use, and interpretation of self-reported and objectively measured OPA in the study of MSP.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Objectively measured versus self-reported occupational physical activity and multisite musculoskeletal pain: a prospective follow-up study at 20 nursing homes in Denmark

Neupane

Karstad

Hallman

et al. 2019

Int Arch Occup Environ Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This method, which has been explained in more detail in the background section, is based on the notion that a log-ratio transformation of compositional variables will result in data expressed in an Euclidian space, which can then be analyzed using conventional statistical methods developed for non-constrained, normally distributed data (29). Thus, we expressed sitting, both self-reported and objectively measured, in terms of an isometric log-ratio (ILR), as used in several other studies applying CoDA to data on time spent in physical activities (18,29,32,34,46,47). The ILR expresses sitting in terms of the ratio of the percentages of time spent sitting to time spent nonsitting, ie, %sit/%non-sit, log-transformed and multiplied by 1/√2, ie, (noting that %non-sit equals 100 -%sit):…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A number of additional factors that could likely influence workers' ability to assess sitting time (18) were added as candidate predictors to the calibration model based only on self-reported sitting. We obtained age (in years -calculated from the date of birth), gender (male/female) and smoking (yes/no).…”

Section: Self-reported Sitting Time and Other Predictorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, such self-reports may result in imprecise and biased estimates of sitting (10)(11)(12)(13)(14). Self-reported total sitting time, work and leisure combined, has been shown to be underestimated by 15−37% (15,16), while underestimation ranged from 1.5−43% among workers selfreporting their occupational sitting time (17,18). Bias in self-reported sitting time may vary depending on the worker's body mass index (BMI) (17,19,20), gender (17,19,21), age (19,22), musculoskeletal pain (17,21), psychosocial work demands (17), and education level (22).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Correction of bias in self-reported sitting time among office workers – a study based on compositional data analysis

Coenen¹,

Mathiassen²,

Beek³

et al. 2019

Scand J Work Environ Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Correction of bias in self-reported sitting time among office workers -a study based on compositional data analysis by Coenen P, Mathiassen SE, van der Beek AJ, Hallman DM Being the first to develop a calibration model using compositional data analysis, we found that a model in which "true" occupational sitting was estimated from self-reported sitting, or even additional predictors, led to substantially more correct estimates than if only self-reports were used. Our models can be used for post-hoc improvement of self-reported sitting data and while designing future studies.Coenen P, Mathiassen SE, van der Beek AJ, Hallman DM. Correction of bias in self-reported sitting time among office workers -a study based on compositional data analysis.Objective Emerging evidence suggests that excessive sitting has negative health effects. However, this evidence largely relies on research using self-reported sitting time, which is known to be biased. To correct this bias, we aimed at developing a calibration model estimating "true" sitting from self-reported sitting.Methods Occupational sitting time was estimated by self-reports (the International Physical Activity Questionnaire) and objective measurements (thigh-worn accelerometer) among 99 Swedish office workers at a governmental agency, at baseline and 3 and 12 months afterwards. Following compositional data analysis procedures, both sitting estimates were transformed into isometric log-ratios (ILR). This effectively addresses that times spent in various activities are inherently dependent and can be presented as values of only 0−100%. Linear regression was used to develop a simple calibration model estimating objectively measured "true" sitting ILR (dependent variable) from self-reported sitting ILR (independent variable). Additional self-reported variables were then added to construct a full calibration model. Performance of the models was assessed by root-meansquare (RMS) differences between estimated and objectively measured values. Models developed on baseline data were validated using the follow-up datasets.Results Uncalibrated self-reported sitting ILR showed an RMS error of 0.767. Simple and full calibration models (incorporating body mass index, office type, and gender) reduced this error to 0.422 (55%) and 0.398 (52%), respectively. In the validations, model performance decreased to 57%/62% (simple models) and 57%/62% (full models) for the two follow-up data sets, respectively.Conclusion Calibration adjusting for errors in self-reported sitting led to substantially more correct estimates of "true" sitting than uncalibrated self-reports. Validation indicated that model performance would change somewhat in new datasets and that full models perform no better than simple models, but calibration remained effective.

show abstract

“…In particular, researchers have suggested that the PA paradox is merely a result of methodological limitations of existing studies (9). One such limitation lies in the measurements of PA, like the use of questionnaires that has been found to be imprecise and potentially biased (10,11). Besides this, existing prospective studies on the PA paradox have disregarded the compositional nature of time-use data like PA (12)(13)(14)(15).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Does high occupational physical activity hamper the beneficial health effects of leisure time physical activity? Evidence of the physical activity health paradox from a prospective study on compositional accelerometry data and long-term sickness absence

Gupta

Dencker-Larsen

Rasmussen

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The ‘physical activity health paradox’ advocates that leisure physical activity (PA) promotes health while occupational PA impairs health. However, this paradox can be explained by methodological limitations of the previous studies—self-reported PA measures, socioeconomic confounding or not addressing the compositional nature of PA. Therefore, this study investigated the association between compositions of accelerometer-based moderate to vigorous PA (MVPA) time at work and leisure and onset of long-term sickness absence (LTSA). Methods: Time spent on MVPA and remaining physical behaviours (sedentary behaviour, standing, light PA and time in bed) at work and leisure was measured for 929 workers using thigh accelerometry and expressed as isometric log-ratios (ilrs). LTSA was register-based events of ≥6 consecutive weeks during 4-year follow-up. The association between ilrs and LTSA was analysed using a Cox proportional hazards model adjusted for remaining physical behaviours and potential confounders, then separately adjusting for and stratifying on education and type of work. Results: During the follow-up, 21% workers experienced LTSA. During leisure, more relative MVPA time was negatively associated with LTSA (20% lower risk with 20 minutes higher MVPA, P=0.02). At work, more relative MVPA time was positively associated with LTSA (15% higher risk with 20 minutes higher MVPA, P=0.02). Beneficial association between MVPA at leisure and LTSA was only observed for the lowest tertile of MVPA at work (P=0.03). Results remained unchanged when adjusted for or stratified on education and type of work. Conclusion: These findings provide further support to the ‘PA health paradox’. Key words: physical activity, sedentary behavior, accelerometers, sick leave, occupational health, time-use epidemiology, register-based sickness absence

show abstract

Is self-reported time spent sedentary and in physical activity differentially biased by age, gender, body mass index, and low-back pain?

Cited by 31 publications

References 46 publications

Objectively measured versus self-reported occupational physical activity and multisite musculoskeletal pain: a prospective follow-up study at 20 nursing homes in Denmark

Objectively measured versus self-reported occupational physical activity and multisite musculoskeletal pain: a prospective follow-up study at 20 nursing homes in Denmark

Correction of bias in self-reported sitting time among office workers – a study based on compositional data analysis

Does high occupational physical activity hamper the beneficial health effects of leisure time physical activity? Evidence of the physical activity health paradox from a prospective study on compositional accelerometry data and long-term sickness absence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About