Article

Parent and child reports of children's activity.

School of Public Health, University of Alberta, 13-106D Clinical Sciences Building, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Health reports / Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Health Information = Rapports sur la santé / Statistique Canada, Centre canadien d'information sur la santé (Impact Factor: 3.31). 10/2008; 19(3):19-24.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This article compares child reports of their physical and sedentary activities with those of their parents.
Data were obtained from the 2003 Children's Lifestyle and School-performance Study (CLASS), a survey of Grade 5 students and their parents in the province of Nova Scotia, Canada. Survey data with responses from Grade 5 students and their parents about the students' physical and sedentary activities were used. Agreement between the parent and child reports was evaluated with weighted kappa. Multilevel logistic regression was used to compare the parent and child reports in relation to the child body weight.
Agreement between the 3958 pairs of parent and child reports was low to fair. Relative to normal weight children, those who were overweight or obese reported more participation in organized and leisure sports and less time watching television than what their parents perceived. Unlike child self-reports, parent reports demonstrated statistically significant associations between the child's activities and body weight.
Based on these findings, parent reports seem to provide a more accurate assessment of activity levels of children younger than 12.

0 Followers
 · 
60 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background. Measures of screen time are often used to assess sedentary behaviour. Participation in activity-based video games (exergames) can contribute to estimates of screen time, as current practices of measuring it do not consider the growing evidence that playing exergames can provide light to moderate levels of physical activity. This study aimed to determine what proportion of time spent playing video games was actually spent playing exergames. Methods. Data were collected via a cross-sectional telephone survey in South Australia. Participants aged 18 years and above (n = 2026) were asked about their video game habits, as well as demographic and socioeconomic factors. In cases where children were in the household, the video game habits of a randomly selected child were also questioned. Results. Overall, 31.3% of adults and 79.9% of children spend at least some time playing video games. Of these, 24.1% of adults and 42.1% of children play exergames, with these types of games accounting for a third of all time that adults spend playing video games and nearly 20% of children's video game time. Conclusions. A substantial proportion of time that would usually be classified as "sedentary" may actually be spent participating in light to moderate physical activity.
    Journal of obesity 06/2014; 2014. DOI:10.1155/2014/287013
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Lack of uniformity in outcome measures used in evaluations of childhood obesity treatment interventions can impede the ability to assess effectiveness and limits comparisons across trials. Lack of uniformity in outcome measures used in evaluations of childhood obesity treatment interventions can impede the ability to assess effectiveness and limits comparisons across trials. Objective: To identify and appraise outcome measures to produce a framework of recommended measures for use in evaluations of childhood obesity treatment interventions. To identify and appraise outcome measures to produce a framework of recommended measures for use in evaluations of childhood obesity treatment interventions. Data sources: Eleven electronic databases were searched between August and December 2011, including MEDLINE; MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations; EMBASE; PsycINFO; Health Management Information Consortium (HMIC); Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED); Global Health, Maternity and Infant Care (all Ovid); Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (EBSCOhost); Science Citation Index (SCI) [Web of Science (WoS)]; and The Cochrane Library (Wiley) - from the date of inception, with no language restrictions. This was supported by review of relevant grey literature and trial databases. Eleven electronic databases were searched between August and December 2011, including MEDLINE; MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations; EMBASE; PsycINFO; Health Management Information Consortium (HMIC); Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED); Global Health, Maternity and Infant Care (all Ovid); Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (EBSCOhost); Science Citation Index (SCI) [Web of Science (WoS)]; and The Cochrane Library (Wiley) - from the date of inception, with no language restrictions. This was supported by review of relevant grey literature and trial databases. Review methods: Two searches were conducted to identify (1) outcome measures and corresponding citations used in published childhood obesity treatment evaluations and (2) manuscripts describing the development and/or evaluation of the outcome measures used in the childhood intervention obesity evaluations. Search 1 search strategy (review of trials) was modelled on elements of a review by Luttikhuis et al. (Oude Luttikhuis H, Baur L, Jansen H, Shrewsbury VA, O'Malley C, Stolk RP, et al. Interventions for treating obesity in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;1:CD001872). Search 2 strategy (methodology papers) was built on Terwee et al.'s search filter (Terwee CB, Jansma EP, Riphagen II, de Vet HCW. Development of a methodological PubMed search filter for finding studies on measurement properties of measurement instruments. Qual Life Res 2009;18:1115-23). Eligible papers were appraised for quality initially by the internal project team. This was followed by an external appraisal by expert collaborators in order to agree which outcome measures should be recommended for the Childhood obesity Outcomes Review (CoOR) outcome measures framework. Two searches were conducted to identify (1) outcome measures and corresponding citations used in published childhood obesity treatment evaluations and (2) manuscripts describing the development and/or evaluation of the outcome measures used in the childhood intervention obesity evaluations. Search 1 search strategy (review of trials) was modelled on elements of a review by Luttikhuis et al. (Oude Luttikhuis H, Baur L, Jansen H, Shrewsbury VA, O'Malley C, Stolk RP, et al. Interventions for treating obesity in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;1:CD001872). Search 2 strategy (methodology papers) was built on Terwee et al.'s search filter (Terwee CB, Jansma EP, Riphagen II, de Vet HCW. Development of a methodological PubMed search filter for finding studies on measurement properties of measurement instruments. Qual Life Res 2009;18:1115-23). Eligible papers were appraised for quality initially by the internal project team. This was f llowed by an external appraisal by expert collaborators in order to agree which outcome measures should be recommended for the Childhood obesity Outcomes Review (CoOR) outcome measures framework. Results: Three hundred and seventy-nine manuscripts describing 180 outcome measures met eligibility criteria. Appraisal of these resulted in the recommendation of 36 measures for the CoOR outcome measures framework. Recommended primary outcome measures were body mass index (BMI) and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Experts did not advocate any self-reported measures where objective measurement was possible (e.g. physical activity). Physiological outcomes hold potential to be primary outcomes, as they are indicators of cardiovascular health, but without evidence of what constitutes a minimally importance difference they have remained as secondary outcomes (although the corresponding lack of evidence for BMI and DXA is acknowledged). No preference-based quality-of-life measures were identified that would enable economic evaluation via calculation of quality-adjusted life-years. Few measures reported evaluating responsiveness. Three hundred and seventy-nine manuscripts describing 180 outcome measures met eligibility criteria. Appraisal of these resulted in the recommendation of 36 measures for the CoOR outcome measures framework. Recommended primary outcome measures were body mass index (BMI) and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Experts did not advocate any self-reported measures where objective measurement was possible (e.g. physical activity). Physiological outcomes hold potential to be primary outcomes, as they are indicators of cardiovascular health, but without evidence of what constitutes a minimally importance difference they have remained as secondary outcomes (although the corresponding lack of evidence for BMI and DXA is acknowledged). No preference-based quality-of-life measures were identified that would enable economic evaluation via calculation of quality-adjusted life-years. Few measures reported evaluating responsiveness. Limitations: Proposed recommended measures are fit for use as outcome measures within studies that evaluate childhood obesity treatment evaluations specifically. These may or may not be suitable for other study designs, and some excluded measures may be more suitable in other study designs. Proposed recommended measures are fit for use as outcome measures within studies that evaluate childhood obesity treatment evaluations specifically. These may or may not be suitable for other study designs, and some excluded measures may be more suitable in other study designs. Conclusions: The CoOR outcome measures framework provides clear guidance of recommended primary and secondary outcome measures. This will enhance comparability between treatment evaluations and ensure that appropriate measures are being used. Where possible, future work should focus on modification and evaluation of existing measures rather than development of tools de nova. In addition, it is recommended that a similar outcome measures framework is produced to support evaluation of adult obesity programmes. The CoOR outcome measures framework provides clear guidance of recommended primary and secondary outcome measures. This will enhance comparability between treatment evaluations and ensure that appropriate measures are being used. Where possible, future work should focus on modification and evaluation of existing measures rather than development of tools de nova. In addition, it is recommended that a similar outcome measures framework is produced to support evaluation of adult obesity programmes. Funding: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme. The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
    Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) 08/2014; 18(51). DOI:10.3310/hta18510 · 5.12 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: IntroductionConsensus is lacking in determining appropriate outcome measures for assessment of childhood obesity treatments. Inconsistency in the use and reporting of such measures impedes comparisons between treatments and limits consideration of effectiveness. This study aimed to produce a framework of recommended outcome measures: the Childhood obesity treatment evaluation Outcomes Review (CoOR) framework.MethodsA systematic review including two searches was conducted to identify (1) existing trial outcome measures and (2) manuscripts describing development/evaluation of outcome measures. Outcomes included anthropometry, diet, eating behaviours, physical activity, sedentary time/behaviour, fitness, physiology, environment, psychological well-being and health-related quality of life. Eligible measures were appraised by the internal team using a system developed from international guidelines, followed by appraisal from national external expert collaborators.Results A total of 25 486 papers were identified through both searches. Eligible search 1 trial papers cited 417 additional papers linked to outcome measures, of which 56 were eligible. A further 297 outcome development/evaluation papers met eligibility criteria from search 2. Combined, these described 191 outcome measures. After internal and external appraisal, 52 measures across 10 outcomes were recommended for inclusion in the CoOR framework.Conclusion Application of the CoOR framework will ensure greater consistency in choosing robust outcome measures that are appropriate to population characteristics.
    Pediatric Obesity 05/2014; 9(6). DOI:10.1111/j.2047-6310.2014.220.x · 2.42 Impact Factor