Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Apr 8;7(4):e013844.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013844.

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

P M Dall  1 , E H Coulter  2 , C F Fitzsimons  3 , D A Skelton  1 , Sfm Chastin  1 ; Seniors USP Team
Collaborators, Affiliations

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

P M Dall et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

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.

Keywords: measurement; population surveillance; sedentary behaviour; sitting; validation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
TAxonomy of Self-reported Sedentary behaviour Tools (TASST).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) diagram of the validation systematic review.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Kohl HW III, Craig CL, Lambert EV, et al. . The pandemic of physical inactivity: global action for public health. Lancet 2012;380:294–305. 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60898-8 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chastin SF, Scwarz U, Skelton DA. Development of a consensus taxonomy of sedentary behaviors (SIT): report of Delphi round 1. PLoS ONE 2013;8:e82313 10.1371/journal.pone.0082313 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sedentary Behaviour Research Network. Standardized use of the terms “sedentary” and “sedentary behaviours”. Appl Physiol Nutr Metabol 2012;37:540–2. 10.1139/h2012-024 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Healy GN, Matthews CE, Dunstan DW, et al. . Sedentary time and cardio-metabolic biomarkers in US adults: NHANES 2003–06. Eur Heart J 2011;32:590–7. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehq451 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Harvey JA, Chastin SFM, Skelton DA. How sedentary are older people? A systematic review of the amount of sedentary behavior. J Aging Phys Act 2015;23:471–87. 10.1123/japa.2014-0164 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources