Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29422051›Full record

SynthesisThe international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity2018

A systematic literature review of reviews on techniques for physical activity measurement in adults: a DEDIPAC study.

Kieran P Dowd, Robert Szeklicki, Marco Alessandro Minetto, Marie H Murphy, Angela Polito, Ezio Ghigo, Hidde van der Ploeg, Ulf Ekelund, Janusz Maciaszek, Rafal Stemplewski and 2 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06883591 (Physical Activity in Patients After Resurfacing and Total Hip Arthroplasty), which is not on this map. Cited by 178 papers, 18 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
178citing papers in PubMed, 18 pooled it
23.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

NCT06883591 completednot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Physical Activity in Patients After Resurfacing and Total Hip Arthroplasty: an Observational Follow-up Study 15 Years After Surgery.

TypeobservationalSponsorRijnstate HospitalRan2025 to 2026Enrolled32ConditionsTotal Hip Arthroplasty (THA), Accelerometers, Resurfacing Hip Arthroplasty
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

178 citing papers in PubMed, 18 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 366 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Validity and reliability of self-reported methods for assessment of 24-h movement behaviours: a systematic review.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2024
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Rates of compliance and adherence to high-intensity interval training: a systematic review and Meta-analyses.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2023
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Changes in Physical Activity Patterns Due to the Covid-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Genetic variants related to physical activity or sedentary behaviour: a systematic review.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2021
    Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

118 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

12 authors at 8 institutions in 7 countries.

Kieran P DowdDepartment of Sport and Health Science, Athlone Institute of Technology, Athlone, Ireland.
Robert SzeklickiUniversity School of Physical Education in Poznan, Poznan, Poland.
Marco Alessandro MinettoDivision of Endocrinology, Diabetology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Turin, Corso Dogliotti 14, 10126, Torino, Italy.
Marie H MurphySchool of Health Science, University of Ulster, Newtownabbey, UK.
Angela PolitoNational Institute for Food and Nutrition Research, Rome, Italy.
Ezio GhigoDivision of Endocrinology, Diabetology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Turin, Corso Dogliotti 14, 10126, Torino, Italy.
Hidde van der PloegDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, VU University Medical Center, EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ulf EkelundMedical Research Council (MRC) Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Janusz MaciaszekUniversity School of Physical Education in Poznan, Poznan, Poland.
Rafal StemplewskiUniversity School of Physical Education in Poznan, Poznan, Poland.
Maciej TomczakUniversity School of Physical Education in Poznan, Poznan, Poland.
Alan E DonnellyDepartment of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, Health Research Institute, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland. alan.donnelly@ul.ie.ORCID 0000-0002-6874-0991
University School of Physical Education in Kraków · PLUniversity of Turin · ITAthlone Institute of Technology · IEIstituto Nazionale di Ricerca per gli Alimenti e la Nutrizione · ITThe University of Sydney · AUUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Limerick · IEUniversity of Ulster · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_U106179473Medical Research Council MC_UU_12015/3
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The links between increased participation in Physical Activity (PA) and improvements in health are well established. As this body of evidence has grown, so too has the search for measures of PA with high levels of methodological effectiveness (i.e. validity, reliability and responsiveness to change). The aim of this "review of reviews" was to provide a comprehensive overview of the methodological effectiveness of currently employed measures of PA, to aid researchers in their selection of an appropriate tool. A total of 63 review articles were included in this review, and the original articles cited by these reviews were included in order to extract detailed information on methodological effectiveness.Self-report measures of PA have been most frequently examined for methodological effectiveness, with highly variable findings identified across a broad range of behaviours. The evidence-base for the methodological effectiveness of objective monitors, particularly accelerometers/activity monitors, is increasing, with lower levels of variability observed for validity and reliability when compared to subjective measures. Unfortunately, responsiveness to change across all measures and behaviours remains under-researched, with limited information available.Other criteria beyond methodological effectiveness often influence tool selection, including cost and feasibility. However, researchers must be aware of the methodological effectiveness of any measure selected for use when examining PA. Although no "perfect" tool for the examination of PA in adults exists, it is suggested that researchers aim to incorporate appropriate objective measures, specific to the behaviours of interests, when examining PA in free-living environments.

Indexed as

AccelerometryExerciseSelf ReportAdultHealth SurveysHumansMaleReproducibility of ResultsAccelerometryAdultsAssessmentHeart rate monitorsMeasurementMotion sensorsPedometersPhysical activityQuestionnairesSelf-report

Identifiers

PMID29422051
PMCPMC5806271
OpenAlexW2787504438

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.