Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research
Date Submitted: Aug 17, 2018
Open Peer Review Period: Aug 21, 2018 - Oct 16, 2018
Date Accepted: Dec 9, 2018
(closed for review but you can still tweet)
Methodology used in Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) studies about sedentary behavior (SB) in children, adolescents and adults: a systematic review using the Checklist for Reporting EMA Studies (CREMAS)
ABSTRACT
Background:
The use of ecological momentary assessment (EMA) to measure sedentary behavior (SB) in children, adolescents and adults can increase understanding of the role of context of SB on health outcomes.
Objective:
The aim of the present study was to systematically review the literature to describe EMA methodology used in studies on SB in youth and adults, verify how many studies adhere to the Methods aspect of the Checklist for Reporting EMA Studies (CREMAS), and detail measures used to assess SB and this associated context.
Methods:
A systematic literature review was conducted in the PUBMED, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus databases, covering the entire period of existence of the databases until January 2018.
Results:
This review presented information about the characteristics and methodology used in 21 articles which utilized EMA to measure SB in youth and adults. There were more studies conducted among youth compared to adults, and studies of youth included more waves and more participants (n=696) than studies with adults (n=97). Most studies (85.7%) adhered to the Methods aspect of the CREMAS Checklist. The main criteria used to measure SB in EMA was self-report (81%) with only 19% measuring SB using objective methods (e.g., accelerometer). The main equipment to collect objective SB was the ActiGraph, and the cut-off point to define SB was <100 counts.min-1. Studies most commonly used a 15-minute window to compare EMA and accelerometer data.
Conclusions:
The majority of studies in this review met minimum CREMAS Checklist criteria for studies conducted with EMA. Most studies measured SB with EMA self-report (n=17; 81,0%), and a few studies also used objective methods (n=4; 19%). The standardization of the 15-minute window criteria to compare EMA and accelerometer data would lead to a comparison between these and new studies. New studies using EMA with mobile phones should be conducted as they can be considered a valid alternative for capturing information about the specific context of SB activities of young people and adults, in real time, or very close to it.
Citation
Per the author's request the PDF is not available.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.