Abstract
Background Despite the widespread endorsement of 24-hour movement guidelines (physical activity, sleep, screentime) for youth, no standardized processes for categorizing guideline achievement exists. Different data handling procedures prior to classification (averaging movement behavior across multiple days, categorizing the number days guidelines are met by each participant) may produce different estimates and several methods are used by researchers. The purpose of this study was to illustrate the impact of different data handling strategies on the proportion of children meeting 24-hour movement guidelines (24hrG) and subsequent associations with overweight and obesity.
Methods A subset of 524 children (ages 5-12yrs) from an observational cohort with complete 24-hour behavior measures on at least 10 days was used to compare the impact of data handling strategies on estimates of meeting 24hrG. Physical activity and sleep were measured via accelerometry. Screentime was measured via parent self-report. Comparison of meeting 24hrG were made using 1) average of behaviors across all days (AVG-24hr), 2) classifying each day as meeting/not meeting 24hrG and evaluating the percentage meeting 24hrG from 10-100% of their measured days (DAYS-24hr), and 3) the average of a random sample of 4 days across 10 iterations (RAND-24hr). The number of times participants met guidelines across all 10 random samples was calculated to examine estimate variability. A second subset of children (N=475) with height and weight data was used to explore the influence of each data handling strategy on children meeting guidelines and the odds of overweight and obesity via logistic regression.
Results Classification for AVG-24hr resulted in 14.7% of participants meeting 24hrG. Classification for DAYS-24hr resulted in 63.5% meeting 24hrG on 10% of measured days, 26.1% meeting 24hrG on 50-80% of measured days with <1% meeting 24hrG on 100% of days. Classification for RAND-24hr resulted in 15.9% of participants meeting 24hrG. Across 10 iterations, 63.6% of participants never met 24hrG regardless of the days sampled, 3.4% always met 24hrG, with the remaining 33.0% classified as meeting 24hrG for at least one of the 10 random iterations of days. Each data handling strategy produced different odds of overweight and obesity for children meeting the guidelines.
Conclusions Varying estimates of meeting the 24hrG and the odds of overweight and obesity results from different data handling strategies and days sampled. Each strategy has strengths and weaknesses. Understanding the impact of each approach on estimates is essential to identifying the association of meeting 24hrG with health outcomes and for identifying day-specific factors that may be associated with meeting 24hrG on a given day.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive And Kidney Diseases of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R01DK116665 (PI Beets), by the by The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health under award, F31HL158016 (von Klinggraeff), F32HL154530 (Burkart), and by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development under award F31HD102045 (Dugger), as well as by the Institutional Development Award (IDeA) from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health under award number P20GM130420 for the Research Center for Child Well-Being. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
All procedures were approved by the University of South Carolina's Institutional Review Board prior to the start of the study (IRB#Pro00080382) and participant consent was obtained prior to being enrolled in the study.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
