Measurement properties of device-based physical activity instruments in ambulatory adults with physical disabilities and/or chronic diseases: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: People with physical disabilities and/or chronic diseases tend to have an inactive lifestyle. Monitoring physical activity levels is important to provide insight on how much and what types of activities people with physical disabilities and/or chronic diseases engage in. This information can be used as input for interventions to promote a physically active lifestyle. Therefore, valid and reliable physical activity measurement instruments are needed. This scoping review aims 1) to provide a critical mapping of the existing literature and 2) directions for future research on measurement properties of device-based instruments assessing physical activity behavior in ambulant adults with physical disabilities and/or chronic diseases. METHODS: 2023 for articles investigating measurement properties of device-based instruments assessing physical activity in ambulatory adults with physical disabilities and/or chronic diseases. For the majority, screening and selection of eligible studies were done in duplicate. Extracted data were publication data, study data, study population, device, studied measurement properties and study outcome. Data were synthesized per device. RESULTS: One hundred three of 21566 Studies were included. 55 Consumer-grade and 23 research-grade devices were studied on measurement properties, using 14 different physical activity outcomes, in 23 different physical disabilities and/or chronic diseases. ActiGraph (n = 28) and Fitbit (n = 39) devices were most frequently studied. Steps (n = 68) was the most common used physical activity outcome. 97 studies determined validity, 11 studies reliability and 6 studies responsiveness. CONCLUSION: This scoping review shows a large variability in research on measurement properties of device-based instruments in ambulatory adults with physical disabilities and/or chronic diseases. The variability highlights a need for standardization of and consensus on research in this field. The review provides directions for future research.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".