TAxonomy of Self-reported Sedentary behaviour Tools (TASST) framework for development, comparison and evaluation of self-report tools: content analysis and systematic review

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

36 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Objective: Sedentary behaviour (SB) has distinct deleterious health outcomes, yet there is no consensus on best practice for measurement. This study aimed to identify the optimal self-report tool for population surveillance of SB, using a systematic framework.

Design: A framework, TAxonomy of Self-reported Sedentary behaviour Tools (TASST), consisting of four domains (type of assessment, recall period, temporal unit and assessment period), was developed based on a systematic inventory of existing tools. The inventory was achieved through a systematic review of studies reporting SB and tracing back to the original description. A systematic review of the accuracy and sensitivity to change of these tools was then mapped against TASST domains.

Data sources: Systematic searches were conducted via EBSCO, reference lists and expert opinion.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: The inventory included tools measuring SB in adults that could be self-completed at one sitting, and excluded tools measuring SB in specific populations or contexts. The systematic review included studies reporting on the accuracy against an objective measure of SB and/or sensitivity to change of a tool in the inventory.

Results: The systematic review initially identified 32 distinct tools (141 questions), which were used to develop the TASST framework. Twenty-two studies evaluated accuracy and/or sensitivity to change representing only eight taxa. Assessing SB as a sum of behaviours and using a previous day recall were the most promising features of existing tools. Accuracy was poor for all existing tools, with underestimation and overestimation of SB. There was a lack of evidence about sensitivity to change.

Conclusions: Despite the limited evidence, mapping existing SB tools onto the TASST framework has enabled informed recommendations to be made about the most promising features for a surveillance tool, identified aspects on which future research and development of SB surveillance tools should focus.

Trial registration number: International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROPSPERO)/CRD42014009851.
Original languageEnglish
JournalBMJ Open
Early online date8 Apr 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2017

Fingerprint

Self Report
Equipment and Supplies
Population Surveillance
Information Storage and Retrieval
Expert Testimony
Practice Guidelines
Health
Research
Population

Keywords

  • sedentary behaviour
  • self-report tool
  • systematic review
  • TASST framework

Cite this

@article{b07dd00b9b674d20b1513169d6c6ff0c,
title = "TAxonomy of Self-reported Sedentary behaviour Tools (TASST) framework for development, comparison and evaluation of self-report tools: content analysis and systematic review",
abstract = "Objective: Sedentary behaviour (SB) has distinct deleterious health outcomes, yet there is no consensus on best practice for measurement. This study aimed to identify the optimal self-report tool for population surveillance of SB, using a systematic framework.Design: A framework, TAxonomy of Self-reported Sedentary behaviour Tools (TASST), consisting of four domains (type of assessment, recall period, temporal unit and assessment period), was developed based on a systematic inventory of existing tools. The inventory was achieved through a systematic review of studies reporting SB and tracing back to the original description. A systematic review of the accuracy and sensitivity to change of these tools was then mapped against TASST domains.Data sources: Systematic searches were conducted via EBSCO, reference lists and expert opinion.Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: The inventory included tools measuring SB in adults that could be self-completed at one sitting, and excluded tools measuring SB in specific populations or contexts. The systematic review included studies reporting on the accuracy against an objective measure of SB and/or sensitivity to change of a tool in the inventory.Results: The systematic review initially identified 32 distinct tools (141 questions), which were used to develop the TASST framework. Twenty-two studies evaluated accuracy and/or sensitivity to change representing only eight taxa. Assessing SB as a sum of behaviours and using a previous day recall were the most promising features of existing tools. Accuracy was poor for all existing tools, with underestimation and overestimation of SB. There was a lack of evidence about sensitivity to change.Conclusions: Despite the limited evidence, mapping existing SB tools onto the TASST framework has enabled informed recommendations to be made about the most promising features for a surveillance tool, identified aspects on which future research and development of SB surveillance tools should focus.Trial registration number: International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROPSPERO)/CRD42014009851.",
keywords = "sedentary behaviour, self-report tool, systematic review, TASST framework",
author = "P.M. Dall and Elaine Coulter and C.F. Fitzsimons and D.A. Skelton and S.F.M. Chastin",
note = "Acceptance email in SAN AAM: replaced with VoR Added project association - ET Gold OA from RCUK block grant Funding note: The study was performed in preparation for the Seniors USP: Understanding Sedentary Patterns project, which was supported by the Medical Research Council [MR/K025023/1]. Compliant with funder policy.",
year = "2017",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013844",
language = "English",
journal = "BMJ Open",
issn = "2044-6055",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - TAxonomy of Self-reported Sedentary behaviour Tools (TASST) framework for development, comparison and evaluation of self-report tools: content analysis and systematic review

AU - Dall, P.M.

AU - Coulter, Elaine

AU - Fitzsimons, C.F.

AU - Skelton, D.A.

AU - Chastin, S.F.M.

N1 - Acceptance email in SAN AAM: replaced with VoR Added project association - ET Gold OA from RCUK block grant Funding note: The study was performed in preparation for the Seniors USP: Understanding Sedentary Patterns project, which was supported by the Medical Research Council [MR/K025023/1]. Compliant with funder policy.

PY - 2017/4

Y1 - 2017/4

N2 - Objective: Sedentary behaviour (SB) has distinct deleterious health outcomes, yet there is no consensus on best practice for measurement. This study aimed to identify the optimal self-report tool for population surveillance of SB, using a systematic framework.Design: A framework, TAxonomy of Self-reported Sedentary behaviour Tools (TASST), consisting of four domains (type of assessment, recall period, temporal unit and assessment period), was developed based on a systematic inventory of existing tools. The inventory was achieved through a systematic review of studies reporting SB and tracing back to the original description. A systematic review of the accuracy and sensitivity to change of these tools was then mapped against TASST domains.Data sources: Systematic searches were conducted via EBSCO, reference lists and expert opinion.Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: The inventory included tools measuring SB in adults that could be self-completed at one sitting, and excluded tools measuring SB in specific populations or contexts. The systematic review included studies reporting on the accuracy against an objective measure of SB and/or sensitivity to change of a tool in the inventory.Results: The systematic review initially identified 32 distinct tools (141 questions), which were used to develop the TASST framework. Twenty-two studies evaluated accuracy and/or sensitivity to change representing only eight taxa. Assessing SB as a sum of behaviours and using a previous day recall were the most promising features of existing tools. Accuracy was poor for all existing tools, with underestimation and overestimation of SB. There was a lack of evidence about sensitivity to change.Conclusions: Despite the limited evidence, mapping existing SB tools onto the TASST framework has enabled informed recommendations to be made about the most promising features for a surveillance tool, identified aspects on which future research and development of SB surveillance tools should focus.Trial registration number: International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROPSPERO)/CRD42014009851.

AB - Objective: Sedentary behaviour (SB) has distinct deleterious health outcomes, yet there is no consensus on best practice for measurement. This study aimed to identify the optimal self-report tool for population surveillance of SB, using a systematic framework.Design: A framework, TAxonomy of Self-reported Sedentary behaviour Tools (TASST), consisting of four domains (type of assessment, recall period, temporal unit and assessment period), was developed based on a systematic inventory of existing tools. The inventory was achieved through a systematic review of studies reporting SB and tracing back to the original description. A systematic review of the accuracy and sensitivity to change of these tools was then mapped against TASST domains.Data sources: Systematic searches were conducted via EBSCO, reference lists and expert opinion.Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: The inventory included tools measuring SB in adults that could be self-completed at one sitting, and excluded tools measuring SB in specific populations or contexts. The systematic review included studies reporting on the accuracy against an objective measure of SB and/or sensitivity to change of a tool in the inventory.Results: The systematic review initially identified 32 distinct tools (141 questions), which were used to develop the TASST framework. Twenty-two studies evaluated accuracy and/or sensitivity to change representing only eight taxa. Assessing SB as a sum of behaviours and using a previous day recall were the most promising features of existing tools. Accuracy was poor for all existing tools, with underestimation and overestimation of SB. There was a lack of evidence about sensitivity to change.Conclusions: Despite the limited evidence, mapping existing SB tools onto the TASST framework has enabled informed recommendations to be made about the most promising features for a surveillance tool, identified aspects on which future research and development of SB surveillance tools should focus.Trial registration number: International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROPSPERO)/CRD42014009851.

KW - sedentary behaviour

KW - self-report tool

KW - systematic review

KW - TASST framework

U2 - 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013844

DO - 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013844

M3 - Article

JO - BMJ Open

JF - BMJ Open

SN - 2044-6055

ER -