S.1.04 - Ecological momentary assessment in physical activity and sedentary behavior research: Evidence, challenges and opportunities

Thursday, May 19, 2022
8:25 - 9:40
Room 153

Details

Purpose: The aim of this symposium is to share expertise on the latest evidence, methodological challenges, and available opportunities of using ecological momentary assessment (EMA) in physical activity (PA) and sedentary behavior (SB) studies. Rationale: EMA is an innovative data collection method, involving repeated sampling of behaviors and experiences in their natural environment. Although EMA is promising to examine the individual and environmental dynamic determinants of PA and SB, the use of EMA is still in its infancy in this field of research. Examining the usefulness of this methodology and gaining insight in the dynamic determinants of PA and SB, can be the first step in the development of more effective behavioral change interventions (e.g. just-in-time adaptive interventions) to increase PA and decrease SB. Objectives: This symposium targets multiple objectives: • Giving an overview of current evidence on time- and event-based EMA studies in the field of PA and SB. • Summarizing the results of EMA studies to gain insight in the dynamic determinants of PA and SB in (older) adults. • Discussing the different stages of development and implementation of EMA, with a special focus on the methodology of event-based EMA and the measurement tools to capture events and trigger questionnaires. • Discussing the methodological challenges that are inherent to EMA studies and to provide implications based on the findings for further research using EMA. Summary: Annick De Paepe will introduce the symposium and explain the need to gain insight in the time- and context-specificity of determinants of PA and SB. Julie Delobelle will focus on event-based EMA methodology, more specifically on the capability of Fitbit to capture events of PA and SB correctly. Genevieve Dunton will present the results of a study that uses event-contingent EMA prompting to capture affective responses during PA. Finally, Malebogo Monnaatsie will discuss the feasibility of EMA in assessing PA and SB in shift workers. Delfien Van Dyck will lead the general discussion, with a special focus on the challenges and opportunities inherent to EMA studies. Format: Chair 0-5 minutes: Introduction by Dr. Annick De Paepe Speakers, each with 10 minutes to present and 5 minutes for questions. 6-21 minutes: Presentation by Julie Delobelle 22-37 minutes: Presentation by Prof. Genevieve Dunton 38-53 minutes: Presentation by Malebogo Monnaatsie Discussant 54-75 minutes: Structured discussion between the presenters and delegates, moderated by Prof. Delfien Van Dyck Interaction: Interaction in the online symposium will be facilitated by the discussant.

Speaker

Attendee3462
Phd Student
Ghent University

Fitbit’s accuracy to measure short bouts of physical activity and sedentary behavior: a validation and sensitivity study

Abstract

Purpose: Sedentary behavior (SB) and a lack of physical activity (PA) are known to have unfavorable effects on our mental and physical well-being. Nevertheless, physical inactivity and sedentary time are still leading risk factors for noncommunicable diseases and death worldwide. Gaining insight in dynamic determinants of these behaviors trough event-based ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is important to counter this health problem. To ensure Fitbits are suitable devices to include in event-based EMA studies, examining the accuracy of the Fitbit to measure short bouts of SB and PA is important. The objective of the current study was to validate the Fitbit for steps in a 1, 5, 10 and 30 minute time interval and on a day level. The second aim was to define a sensitive threshold of steps/minute to assess bouts of moderate PA and SB, measured with Fitbit.

Methods: 20 adults (18-65y) and 20 older adults (65+) were recruited for this validation study. Four different activity trackers were worn during three consecutive days: a Fitbit Ionic and a Fitbit Inspire 2 at the non-dominant wrist, an ActivPal for SB at the thigh and an Actigraph GT3X+ for PA at the hip. Correlation analysis and Bland-Altman plots were used to compare the Fitbits with the two validated devices, as well as the data of the two Fitbits themselves. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for reaching <10 (SB) and >100 (PA) steps/minute and for defining the right threshold.


Results: Preliminary results showed a systematic underestimation of the Fitbit to measure total steps during short bouts of PA and on a day level (mean percentage error: 39%), compared to the Actigraph. The different Fitbits showed similar results. Further analyses will be conducted and results will be presented at the conference.


Conclusions: EMA questionnaires or supporting messages could be initialized following a favorable event (e.g. walking five minutes), but the systematic underestimation of PA should be taken into account. Defining a sensitive threshold of number of steps/minute for moderate PA and SB for Fitbit, will allow to capture the event correctly. These findings will therefore have important implications for further event-based EMA studies.

Agenda Item Image
Attendee3811
University of Southern California

An Ecological Momentary Assessment Study of Affectively-charged Motivational States and Physical Activity

Abstract

Background: Affectively-charged motivational states refer to desires, wants, cravings and urges to engage in health-related behaviors. However, the extent to which they predict physical activity is largely unknown. Also, there is growing interest in understanding how affectively-charged motivations for physical activity vary from moment-to-moment as they offer a potential target for just-in-time intervention strategies. The objectives of the current analysis was to use Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) to examine changes in affectively-charged motivations for physical activity across the day and determine whether they have temporally-specific associations with physical activity of varying intensities.

Methods: A sample of adults (ages 19-65) (61% female) participated in a 14-day study. Affectively-charged motivations (i.e., “dread” vs. “excited” on a 0-100 scale) for upcoming physical activity were assessed in real-time using smartphone-based EMA in the evening (“next day”), morning (“next 2 hours”), at random times (“next 2 hours”), and 15 min before physical activity (“next 15 min”). Participants also wore an Actigraph GT3X accelerometer on their waist across this period.


Results: Complete data were available for up to 56 participants. Affectively-charged motivations for physical activity differed by time of day (F=14.3, p<.001) with the most positive values occurring 15 min before physical activity (M= 73.3, SD=20.9), followed by evenings (M= 72.7, SD=22.2), random times throughout the day (M= 68.5, SD=21.1), and mornings (M= 66.2, SD=19.0). On average compared to 15 min before physical activity, more positive affectively-charged motivations in the evening were associated with engaging in more light physical activity min/day (r=.248, p=.066) and total physical activity (light/moderate/ vigorous) min/day (r=.282, p=.035). On average compared to 15 min before physical activity, more positive affectively-charged motivations in the morning were associated with engaging in more vigorous min/day (r=.315, p=.029) and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity min/day (r=.307, p=.034).


Conclusion: Positive affective motivation for upcoming physical activity varies throughout the day with the highest levels immediately before a physical activity bout. Strategies to boost positive affective motivation in the evenings may be useful in promoting lower intensity physical activity whereas strategies enhancing morning positive affective motivation may help promote higher intensity activities.

Attendee647
PhD student
University of Southern Queensland

The feasibility of an ecological momentary assessment (EMA) to measure physical activity and sedentary behaviour in shift workers

Abstract

Purpose: Shift work involves atypical work schedules, as such mobile ecological momentary assessment (EMA) might be a feasible tool to measure physical activity (PA) and sedentary behaviour (SB) in shift workers. The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of the Smartphone Ecological Momentary Assessment (SEMA) to measure physical activity (PA) and sedentary behaviour (SB) in shift workers. A second aim was to compare feasibility in shift and non-shift workers.

Methods: Participants were recruited via social media and snowball sampling. Five SEMA prompts were sent every 3 hours to participants’ phones for 7-10 days assessing PA and SB. The SEMA prompts were tailored according to work schedule for the shift workers, while prompts to non-shift workers were at standardised times.


Results: Participants included 69 shift workers and 51 non-shift workers, 58% were female and, mean age was 36.0 (SD 10.6) years. An average of 38.5 EMA prompts were sent per individual, with 0.4 min taken to finish each survey. Compliance with completing the EMA prompts was lower in shift workers (63.9 %) than non-shift workers (68.6%). The most frequently answered SEMA was the first prompt of the day (24%), while the least frequent responses were observed for the 5th daily prompt (14%) in both shift and non-shift workers. Participants completed more EMA responses on a work day. Our results also show that EMA compliance was unrelated to age, BMI and gender.


Conclusions: Our findings suggest that mobile EMA is feasible in assessing physical activity and sedentary behaviour in shift workers. Tailoring prompts according to work schedules may increase the compliance rate,. EMA responses were reduced in all the groups after the fourth prompt, suggesting that there might be a limit to daily prompts. Using EMA in shift workers is therefore feasible and should be considered as an option when quantifying movement in this cohort.


Keywords: shift work, ecological momentary assessment, physical activity, sedentary behaviour

Chair

Attendee3717
Ghent University

Discussant

Attendee436
Ghent University

loading