TAxonomy of Self-reported Sedentary behaviour Tools (TASST) framework for development, comparison and evaluation of self-report tools: content analysis and systematic review

Dall, P.M., Coulter, E.H. , Fitzsimons, C.F., Skelton, D.A. and Chastin, S.F.M. (2017) TAxonomy of Self-reported Sedentary behaviour Tools (TASST) framework for development, comparison and evaluation of self-report tools: content analysis and systematic review. BMJ Open, 7(4), e013844. (doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013844) (PMID:28391233) (PMCID:PMC5775464)

140015.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.



Objective: Sedentary behaviour (SB) has distinct deleterious health outcomes, yet there is no consensus on best practice for measurement. This study aimed to identify the optimal self-report tool for population surveillance of SB, using a systematic framework. Design: A framework, TAxonomy of Self-reported Sedentary behaviour Tools (TASST), consisting of four domains (type of assessment, recall period, temporal unit and assessment period), was developed based on a systematic inventory of existing tools. The inventory was achieved through a systematic review of studies reporting SB and tracing back to the original description. A systematic review of the accuracy and sensitivity to change of these tools was then mapped against TASST domains. Data sources: Systematic searches were conducted via EBSCO, reference lists and expert opinion. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: The inventory included tools measuring SB in adults that could be self-completed at one sitting, and excluded tools measuring SB in specific populations or contexts. The systematic review included studies reporting on the accuracy against an objective measure of SB and/or sensitivity to change of a tool in the inventory. Results: The systematic review initially identified 32 distinct tools (141 questions), which were used to develop the TASST framework. Twenty-two studies evaluated accuracy and/or sensitivity to change representing only eight taxa. Assessing SB as a sum of behaviours and using a previous day recall were the most promising features of existing tools. Accuracy was poor for all existing tools, with underestimation and overestimation of SB. There was a lack of evidence about sensitivity to change. Conclusions: Despite the limited evidence, mapping existing SB tools onto the TASST framework has enabled informed recommendations to be made about the most promising features for a surveillance tool, identified aspects on which future research and development of SB surveillance tools should focus. Trial registration number: International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROPSPERO)/CRD42014009851.

Item Type:Articles
Keywords:Measurement, population surveillance, sedentary behaviour, sitting, validation.
Glasgow Author(s) Enlighten ID:Coulter, Dr Elaine
Authors: Dall, P.M., Coulter, E.H., Fitzsimons, C.F., Skelton, D.A., and Chastin, S.F.M.
College/School:College of Medical Veterinary and Life Sciences > School of Medicine, Dentistry & Nursing > Nursing and Health Care
Journal Name:BMJ Open
Publisher:BMJ Publishing Group
ISSN (Online):2044-6055
Published Online:08 April 2017
Copyright Holders:Copyright © 2017 The Authors
First Published:First published in BMJ Open 7(4): e013844
Publisher Policy:Reproduced under a Creative Commons License

University Staff: Request a correction | Enlighten Editors: Update this record

Project CodeAward NoProject NamePrincipal InvestigatorFunder's NameFunder RefLead Dept
620531Seniors - understanding sedentary behaviourGeoffrey DerMedical Research Council (MRC)MR/K025023/1IHW - MRC/CSO SPHU