ArticlePloS one2025
Assessing adherence to physical activity guidelines and correlates among older Korean adults with a focus on 10-minute bout duration using subjective and objective measures.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding physical activity (PA) patterns in older adults is crucial for effectively promoting adherence to PA guidelines. However, measuring PA can be challenging because it involves a balance between ease of administration and accuracy of data collection. The primary objective of this study was to analyze PA levels in older Korean adults using both self-reported and objective accelerometer measures, and the secondary objective was to investigate the factors associated with adherence to PA guidelines.
methodsUsing data from the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES VII-2) 2017, we assessed 425 older adults who provided both self-reported and accelerometer data. Adherence to PA guidelines was evaluated using two different thresholds for the accelerometer data, each applied both strictly and with a tolerance of one to two minutes when defining a 10-minute bout.
resultsSelf-reported data indicated a 34% adherence rate, whereas accelerometer-based rates ranged from 16% to 62.8%, depending on the cutoff values and tolerance settings. Bland-Altman analyses demonstrated notable differences between subjective and objective measurements. In terms of correlates, the questionnaire data highlighted factors such as education and household income, whereas the accelerometer-based findings emphasized sex, age, hypertriglyceridemia, and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol.
conclusionsThis study revealed substantial discrepancies in both moderate-to-vigorous PA adherence estimates and significant predictors when comparing self-reported surveys to accelerometer data among older adults. For estimating population-level adherence, in the absence of accelerometer cutoff values established by a specialized lab, both self-reported data and accelerometer measurements offer unique insights. Meanwhile, when analyzing the factors influencing PA adherence, accelerometer data may be preferable, as subjective biases in self-report can affect the observed correlates in statistical results.
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.