ArticlePloS one2015
Developing a Method to Test the Validity of 24 Hour Time Use Diaries Using Wearable Cameras: A Feasibility Pilot.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 95 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recommendations for determining the validity of consumer wearable and smartphone step count: expert statement and checklist of the INTERLIVE network.British journal of sports medicine · 2021Guideline
- Generation of a Free-Living Ground-Truth Validation Dataset for Wearable Measures of Physical Activity, Sedentary Behavior, Sleep, and Heart Rate in Adults (OxWEARS): Protocol for a Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- CAPTURE-24: A large dataset of wrist-worn activity tracker data collected in the wild for human activity recognition.Scientific data · 2024Article
- Criterion-Related Validity of Consumer-Wearable Activity Trackers for Estimating Steps in Primary Schoolchildren under Controlled Conditions: Fit-Person Study.Journal of sports science & medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Vision-Based Methods for Food and Fluid Intake Monitoring: A Literature Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Simulating patterns of life: More representative time-activity patterns that account for context.Environment international · 2023Review
- Automated wearable cameras for improving recall of diet and time use in Uganda: a cross-sectional feasibility study.Nutrition journal · 2023Article
- Article
- Using Wearable Cameras to Investigate Health-Related Daily Life Experiences: A Literature Review of Precautions and Risks in Empirical Studies.Research ethics · 2022Article
- Using Wearable Cameras to Assess Foods and Beverages Omitted in 24 Hour Dietary Recalls and a Text Entry Food Record App.Nutrients · 2021Article
- Validation of Wearable Camera Still Images to Assess Posture in Free-Living Conditions.Journal for the measurement of physical behaviour · 2021Article
- A new perspective from time use research on the effects of social restrictions on COVID-19 behavioral infection risk.PloS one · 2021Article
- Feasibility Study Comparing Physical Activity Classifications from Accelerometers with Wearable Camera Data.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Trends and correlates of meeting 24-hour movement guidelines: a 15-year study among 167,577 Thai adults.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2020Article
- Daily metabolic expenditures: estimates from US, UK and polish time-use data.BMC public health · 2019Article
- A short history of time use research; implications for public health.BMC public health · 2019Review
- A validation study of the Eurostat harmonised European time use study (HETUS) diary using wearable technology.BMC public health · 2019Article
- Use of previous-day recalls of physical activity and sedentary behavior in epidemiologic studies: results from four instruments.BMC public health · 2019Article
- Usefulness of Wearable Cameras as a Tool to Enhance Chronic Disease Self-Management: Scoping Review.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Self-report time use diaries collect a continuous sequenced record of daily activities but the validity of the data they produce is uncertain. This study tests the feasibility of using wearable cameras to generate, through image prompted interview, reconstructed 'near-objective' data to assess their validity. 16 volunteers completed the Harmonised European Time Use Survey (HETUS) diary and used an Autographer wearable camera (recording images at approximately 15 second intervals) for the waking hours of the same 24-hour period. Participants then completed an interview in which visual images were used as prompts to reconstruct a record of activities for comparison with the diary record. 14 participants complied with the full collection protocol. We compared time use and number of discrete activities from the diary and camera records (using 10 classifications of activity). In terms of aggregate totals of daily time use we found no significant difference between the diary and camera data. In terms of number of discrete activities, participants reported a mean of 19.2 activities per day in the diaries, while image prompted interviews revealed 41.1 activities per day. The visualisations of the individual activity sequences reveal some potentially important differences between the two record types, which will be explored at the next project stage. This study demonstrates the feasibility of using wearable cameras to reconstruct time use through image prompted interview in order to test the concurrent validity of 24-hour activity time-use budgets. In future we need a suitably powered study to assess the validity and reliability of 24-hour time use diaries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.