A Web-Based, Time-Use App To Assess Children’s Movement Behaviors: Validation Study of My E-Diary for Activities and Lifestyle (MEDAL)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Existing modes of collecting self-reported 24-hour movement information from children, including digital assessments, have not been demonstrated to be of acceptable validity when compared to objective measurements. My E-Diary for Activities and Lifestyle (MEDAL) is an interactive web-based diary developed to collect time-use information from children aged 10 years and older. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the validity of MEDAL for assessing children's movement behaviors by comparing self-reported and accelerometer-measured time spent in movement behavior among children in Singapore aged 10-11 years. METHODS: Funding for this study was obtained in October 2017, and data were collected between April and August 2020. Participants recorded their daily activities using MEDAL over 2 specified weekdays and 2 weekend days and wore an Actigraph accelerometer on their nondominant wrist throughout the study to objectively assess movement behaviors. Spearman correlation coefficient and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were used to compare the accelerometer measurements and self-reports for each movement behavior. Bland-Altman plots were generated to investigate trends of bias in the self-reports. RESULTS: Among the participants aged 10-11 years (29/49, 59% boys), we observed that children reported lower light physical activity (LPA) and higher moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), inactivity, and night sleep than that measured by the accelerometer. There was a moderate-to-strong correlation between self-reported and accelerometer-measured MVPA (r=0.37; 95% CI 0.20-0.54), inactivity (r=0.36; 95% CI 0.18-0.54), and night sleep (r=0.58; 95% CI 0.43-0.74); the correlation for LPA was poor (r=0.19; 95% CI 0.02-0.36). Agreement was poor for all behaviors (MVPA: ICC=0.24, 95% CI 0.07-0.40; LPA: ICC=0.19, 95% CI 0.01-0.36; inactivity: ICC=0.29, 95% CI 0.11-0.44; night sleep: ICC=0.45, 95% CI 0.29-0.58). There was stronger correlation and agreement on weekdays for inactivity and night sleep; conversely, there was stronger correlation and agreement for MVPA and LPA on weekend days. Finally, based on Bland-Altman plots, we observed that with increasing MVPA, children tended to report higher MVPA than that measured by the accelerometer. There were no clear trends for the other behaviors. CONCLUSIONS: MEDAL may be used to assess the movement behaviors of children. Based on self-reports, the children are able to estimate their time spent in MVPA, inactivity, and night sleep although actual time spent in these behaviors may differ from accelerometer-derived estimates; self-reported LPA warrant cautious interpretation. Observable differences in reporting accuracy exist between weekdays and weekend days.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".