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

Dall, P M, Coulter, E H, Fitzsimons, C F, Skelton, D A, Chastin, Sebastien F.M. and , Seniors USP Team (2017) TAxonomy of Self-reported Sedentary behaviour Tools (TASST) framework for development, comparison and evaluation of self-report tools:content analysis and systematic review. BMJ Open, 7 (4). ISSN 2044-6055

[img]
Preview
PDF (BMJOpen_Dall_etal) - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (1MB) | Preview

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.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.
Uncontrolled Keywords: behavior therapy,benchmarking,health promotion,humans,population surveillance,public health,sedentary lifestyle,self report,journal article,review
Faculty \ School: Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > School of Health Sciences
Depositing User: Pure Connector
Date Deposited: 05 Jan 2018 14:47
Last Modified: 22 Jul 2020 01:55
URI: https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/65858
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013844

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item