The widely accepted definition of sedentary behaviour [SB] refers to any waking behaviour characterized by an energy expenditure ≤1.5 metabolic equivalents [METs] while in a sitting or reclining posture. At present, there is no single field-based device which objectively measures sleep, posture and activity intensity simultaneously. The aim of this study was to develop a novel integrative procedure [INT] to combine information from two validated activity monitors on sleep, activity intensity and posture, the three key dimensions of SB

Blundell, John

Buckland, Nicola

Butler, Edward

Dalton, Michelle

Finlayson, Graham

Gibbons, Catherine

Myers, Anna

BMC Public Health

Sheffield Hallam University Research Archive

A novel integrative procedure for identifying and integrating three-dimensions of objectively measured free-living sedentary behaviour

Research @Leeds Trinity University

Anna Myers

Catherine Gibbons

Edward Butler

Michelle Dalton

Nicola Buckland

John Blundell

Graham Finlayson

Crossref

The widely accepted definition of sedentary behaviour [SB] refers to any waking behaviour characterized by an energy expenditure ≤1.5 metabolic equivalents [METs] while in a sitting or reclining posture. At present, there is no single field-based device which objectively measures sleep, posture and activity intensity simultaneously. The aim of this study was to develop a novel integrative procedure [INT] to combine information from two validated activity monitors on sleep, activity intensity and posture, the three key dimensions of SB.Participants in this analysis were initially recruited from a series of three studies conducted between December 2014 and June 2016 at the University of Leeds. Sixty-three female participants aged 37.1 (13.6) years with a body mass index of 29.6 (4.7) kg/m2 were continuously monitored for 5-7 days with the SenseWear Armband [SWA] (sleep and activity intensity) and the activPAL [AP] (posture). Data from both activity monitors were analysed separately and integrated resulting in three measures of sedentary time. Differences in Sedentary time between the three measurement methods were assessed as well as how well the three measures correlated.The three measures of sedentary time were positively correlated, with the weakest relationship between SEDSWA (awake and <1.5 METs) and SEDAP (awake and sitting/lying posture) [r(61) = .37,p = .003], followed by SEDSWA and SEDINT (awake, <1.5 METs and sitting/lying posture) [r(61) = .58,p < .001], and the strongest relationship was between SEDAP and SEDINT [r(61) = .91,p < .001]. There was a significant difference between the three measures of sedentary time [F(1.18,73.15) = 104.70,p < .001]. Post-hoc tests revealed all three methods differed significantly from each other [p < .001]. SEDSWA resulted in the most sedentary time 11.74 (1.60) hours/day, followed by SEDAP 10.16 (1.75) hours/day, and SEDINT 9.10 (1.67) hours/day. Weekday and weekend day sedentary time did not differ for any of the measurement methods [p = .04-.25].Information from two validated activity monitors was combined to obtain an objective measure of free-living SB based on posture and activity intensity during waking hours. The amount of sedentary time accumulated varied according to the definition of SB and its measurement. The novel data integration and processing procedures presented in this paper represents an opportunity to investigate whether different components of SB are differentially related to health end points

Myers, A

Gibbons, C

Butler, E

Dalton, M

Buckland, N

Blundell, J

Finlayson, G

White Rose Research Online

A novel integrative procedure for identifying and integrating three-dimensions of objectively measured free-living sedentary behaviour.

Background: The widely accepted definition of sedentary behaviour [SB] refers to any waking behaviour characterized

by an energy expenditure ≤1.5 metabolic equivalents [METs] while in a sitting or reclining posture. At present, there is

no single field-based device which objectively measures sleep, posture and activity intensity simultaneously. The aim of

this study was to develop a novel integrative procedure [INT] to combine information from two validated activity

monitors on sleep, activity intensity and posture, the three key dimensions of SB.

Methods: Participants in this analysis were initially recruited from a series of three studies conducted between December

2014 and June 2016 at the University of Leeds. Sixty-three female participants aged 37.1 (13.6) years with a body mass

index of 29.6 (4.7) kg/m2 were continuously monitored for 5–7 days with the SenseWear Armband [SWA] (sleep and

activity intensity) and the activPAL [AP] (posture). Data from both activity monitors were analysed separately and

integrated resulting in three measures of sedentary time. Differences in Sedentary time between the three

measurement methods were assessed as well as how well the three measures correlated.

Results: The three measures of sedentary time were positively correlated, with the weakest relationship between

SEDSWA (awake and <1.5 METs) and SEDAP (awake and sitting/lying posture) [r(61) = .37,p = .003], followed by SEDSWA and

SEDINT (awake, <1.5 METs and sitting/lying posture) [r(61) = .58,p < .001], and the strongest relationship was between

SEDAP and SEDINT [r(61) = .91,p < .001]. There was a significant difference between the three measures of sedentary time

[F(1.18,73.15) = 104.70,p < .001]. Post-hoc tests revealed all three methods differed significantly from each other [p < .001].

SEDSWA resulted in the most sedentary time 11.74 (1.60) hours/day, followed by SEDAP 10.16 (1.75) hours/day, and SEDINT

9.10 (1.67) hours/day. Weekday and weekend day sedentary time did not differ for any of the measurement methods

[p = .04–.25].

Conclusion: Information from two validated activity monitors was combined to obtain an objective measure of freeliving

SB based on posture and activity intensity during waking hours. The amount of sedentary time accumulated

varied according to the definition of SB and its measurement. The novel data integration and processing procedures

presented in this paper represents an opportunity to investigate whether different components of SB are differentially

related to health end points

Myers, A.

Gibbons, C.

Butler, E.

Dalton, M.

Buckland, N.J.

Bundell, J.

Finlayson, G.

The widely accepted definition of sedentary behaviour [SB] refers to any waking behaviour characterized by an energy expenditure ≤1.5 metabolic equivalents [METs] while in a sitting or reclining posture. At present, there is no single field-based device which objectively measures sleep, posture and activity intensity simultaneously. The aim of this study was to develop a novel integrative procedure [INT] to combine information from two validated activity monitors on sleep, activity intensity and posture, the three key dimensions of SB. Participants in this analysis were initially recruited from a series of three studies conducted between December 2014 and June 2016 at the University of Leeds. Sixty-three female participants aged 37.1 (13.6) years with a body mass index of 29.6 (4.7) kg/m2 were continuously monitored for 5-7 days with the SenseWear Armband [SWA] (sleep and activity intensity) and the activPAL [AP] (posture). Data from both activity monitors were analysed separately and integrated resulting in three measures of sedentary time. Differences in Sedentary time between the three measurement methods were assessed as well as how well the three measures correlated. The three measures of sedentary time were positively correlated, with the weakest relationship between SEDSWA (awake and <1.5 METs) and SEDAP (awake and sitting/lying posture) [r(61) = .37,p = .003], followed by SEDSWA and SEDINT (awake, <1.5 METs and sitting/lying posture) [r(61) = .58,p < .001], and the strongest relationship was between SEDAP and SEDINT [r(61) = .91,p < .001]. There was a significant difference between the three measures of sedentary time [F(1.18,73.15) = 104.70,p < .001]. Post-hoc tests revealed all three methods differed significantly from each other [p < .001]. SEDSWA resulted in the most sedentary time 11.74 (1.60) hours/day, followed by SEDAP 10.16 (1.75) hours/day, and SEDINT 9.10 (1.67) hours/day. Weekday and weekend day sedentary time did not differ for any of the measurement methods [p = .04-.25]. Information from two validated activity monitors was combined to obtain an objective measure of free-living SB based on posture and activity intensity during waking hours. The amount of sedentary time accumulated varied according to the definition of SB and its measurement. The novel data integration and processing procedures presented in this paper represents an opportunity to investigate whether different components of SB are differentially related to health end points

Abstract Background The widely accepted definition of sedentary behaviour [SB] refers to any waking behaviour characterized by an energy expenditure ≤1.5 metabolic equivalents [METs] while in a sitting or reclining posture. At present, there is no single field-based device which objectively measures sleep, posture and activity intensity simultaneously. The aim of this study was to develop a novel integrative procedure [INT] to combine information from two validated activity monitors on sleep, activity intensity and posture, the three key dimensions of SB. Methods Participants in this analysis were initially recruited from a series of three studies conducted between December 2014 and June 2016 at the University of Leeds. Sixty-three female participants aged 37.1 (13.6) years with a body mass index of 29.6 (4.7) kg/m2 were continuously monitored for 5–7 days with the SenseWear Armband [SWA] (sleep and activity intensity) and the activPAL [AP] (posture). Data from both activity monitors were analysed separately and integrated resulting in three measures of sedentary time. Differences in Sedentary time between the three measurement methods were assessed as well as how well the three measures correlated. Results The three measures of sedentary time were positively correlated, with the weakest relationship between SEDSWA (awake and <1.5 METs) and SEDAP (awake and sitting/lying posture) [r(61) = .37,p = .003], followed by SEDSWA and SEDINT (awake, <1.5 METs and sitting/lying posture) [r(61) = .58,p < .001], and the strongest relationship was between SEDAP and SEDINT [r(61) = .91,p < .001]. There was a significant difference between the three measures of sedentary time [F(1.18,73.15) = 104.70,p < .001]. Post-hoc tests revealed all three methods differed significantly from each other [p < .001]. SEDSWA resulted in the most sedentary time 11.74 (1.60) hours/day, followed by SEDAP 10.16 (1.75) hours/day, and SEDINT 9.10 (1.67) hours/day. Weekday and weekend day sedentary time did not differ for any of the measurement methods [p = .04–.25]. Conclusion Information from two validated activity monitors was combined to obtain an objective measure of free-living SB based on posture and activity intensity during waking hours. The amount of sedentary time accumulated varied according to the definition of SB and its measurement. The novel data integration and processing procedures presented in this paper represents an opportunity to investigate whether different components of SB are differentially related to health end points

Directory of Open Access Journals

https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/126235/1/s12889-017-4994-0.pdf

A novel integrative procedure for identifying and integrating three-dimensions of objectively measured free-living sedentary behaviour

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Sheffield Hallam University Research Archive

Research @Leeds Trinity University

Crossref

White Rose Research Online

White Rose Research Online

Sheffield Hallam University Research Archive

Directory of Open Access Journals

Research @Leeds Trinity University

White Rose Research Online