Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34090411›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2021

Comparison of self-reported & device-based, measured physical activity among children in Germany.

Alexander Burchartz, Doris Oriwol, Simon Kolb, Steffen C E Schmidt, Kathrin Wunsch, Kristin Manz, Claudia Niessner, Alexander Woll

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Compensation of overall physical activity in (pre)adolescent girls - the CReActivity project.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

8 authors.

Alexander BurchartzInstitute of Sports and Sports Science, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Engler-Bunte-Ring 15, Building 40.40, 76131, Karlsruhe, Germany. alexander.burchartz@kit.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-1338-5395
Doris OriwolInstitute of Sports and Sports Science, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Engler-Bunte-Ring 15, Building 40.40, 76131, Karlsruhe, Germany.
Simon KolbInstitute of Sports and Sports Science, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Engler-Bunte-Ring 15, Building 40.40, 76131, Karlsruhe, Germany.
Steffen C E SchmidtInstitute of Sports and Sports Science, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Engler-Bunte-Ring 15, Building 40.40, 76131, Karlsruhe, Germany.
Kathrin WunschInstitute of Sports and Sports Science, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Engler-Bunte-Ring 15, Building 40.40, 76131, Karlsruhe, Germany.
Kristin ManzRobert Koch Institute, Nordufer 20, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Claudia NiessnerInstitute of Sports and Sports Science, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Engler-Bunte-Ring 15, Building 40.40, 76131, Karlsruhe, Germany.
Alexander WollInstitute of Sports and Sports Science, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Engler-Bunte-Ring 15, Building 40.40, 76131, Karlsruhe, Germany.

Funding

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung 01ER1503
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs children show a more complex but less structured movement behavior than adults, assessment of their many spontaneous and impulsive movements is a challenge for physical activity (PA) assessment. Since neither questionnaires nor accelerometers enable optimal detection of all facets of PA, a multimodal, combined approach of self-reported and device-based methods is recommended. Based on the number of days on which the participants reached the physical activity (PA) values given in the WHO guideline, this study examines 1) the difference between self-reported and device-based, measured PA and 2) whether PA differences between age and gender groups obtained by two methods are comparable.

methodsParticipants aged 6-17 years were randomly chosen and data were collected representatively at 167 sample points throughout Germany within the Motorik-Modul Study. PA of n = 2694 participants (52.3% female) was measured using the ActiGraph accelerometer (ACC) and a physical activity questionnaire (PAQ). The sample was divided into three age groups (6-10 yrs. n = 788, 11-13 yrs. n = 823, 14-17 yrs. n = 1083). Numbers of days per week with at least 60 min moderate to vigorous PA (MVPA) were analyzed for both methods.

resultsOnly every 25th respondent (4%) reaches the WHO standard of 60 min MVPA every day if measured with ACC. Self-reported PA was slightly higher (9%) (mean

conclusionChildren and adolescents living in Germany show a very low adherence to the WHO guideline on PA. While younger children are much more active with their free play, especially children over 10 years of age and especially girls should be the target of programs to increase PA.

Indexed as

EthnicityExerciseAccelerometryAdolescentAdultAgedChildFemaleGermanyHumansMaleSelf ReportSurveys and QuestionnairesAccelerometerAdolescentsCross table heat mapsGuidelineKiGGSMoMo

Identifiers

PMID34090411
PMCPMC8180063

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.