Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12238942›Full record

SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2002

Utility of pedometers for assessing physical activity: convergent validity.

Catrine Tudor-Locke, Joel E Williams, Jared P Reis, Delores Pluto

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 145 papers, 14 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
145citing papers in PubMed, 14 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

145 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. A systematic literature review of reviews on techniques for physical activity measurement in adults: a DEDIPAC study.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2018
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Validity of activity monitors in health and chronic disease: a systematic review.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2012
    Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Establishing Effectiveness of a Community-based, Physical Activity Program for Fathers and Daughters: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2022
    Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

85 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Catrine Tudor-LockeDepartment of Exercise and Wellness, Arizona State University, Mesa, Arizona 85212, USA.
Joel E Williams
Jared P Reis
Delores Pluto

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Valid assessment of physical activity is important to researchers and practitioners interested in surveillance, screening, programme evaluation and intervention. The validity of an assessment instrument is commonly considered its most important attribute. Convergent validity is the extent to which an instrument's output is associated with that of other instruments intended to measure the same exposure of interest. A systematic review of the literature produced 25 articles directly relevant to the question of convergent validity of pedometers against accelerometers, observation, and self-reported measures of physical activity. Reported correlations were pooled and a median r-value was computed. Pedometers correlate strongly (median r = 0.86) with different accelerometers (specifically uniaxial accelerometers) depending on the specific instruments used, monitoring frame and conditions implemented, and the manner in which the outputs are expressed. Pedometers also correlate strongly (median r = 0.82) with time in observed activity. Time in observed inactivity correlated negatively with pedometer outputs (median r = -0.44). The relationship with observed steps taken depended upon monitoring conditions and speed of walking. The highest agreement was apparent during ambulatory activity (running, walking) or during sitting (when both observation and pedometers would register few steps taken). There was consistent evidence of reduced accuracy during slow walking. Pedometers correlate moderately with different measures of energy expenditure (median r = 0.68). The relationship between pedometer outputs and energy expenditure is complicated by the use of many different direct and indirect measures of energy expenditure and population samples. Concordance with self-reported physical activity (median r = 0.33) varied depending upon the self-report instrument used, individuals assessed, and how pedometer outputs are expressed (e.g. steps, distance travelled, energy expenditure). Pedometer output has an inverse relationship with reported time spent sitting (r = -0.38). The accumulated evidence herein provides ample support that the simple and inexpensive pedometer is a valid option for assessing physical activity in research and practice.

Indexed as

Activities of Daily LivingAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildEnergy MetabolismErgonomicsExerciseFemaleHumansLocomotionMaleMiddle AgedMonitoring, PhysiologicMotor Activity

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.