...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of physical activity & health >Application of an Ecological Momentary Assessment Protocol in a Workplace Intervention: Assessing Compliance, Criterion Validity, and Reactivity
【24h】

Application of an Ecological Momentary Assessment Protocol in a Workplace Intervention: Assessing Compliance, Criterion Validity, and Reactivity

机译:生态瞬间评估协议在工作场所干预中的应用:评估合规性,标准有效性和反应性

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background: Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is a method of collecting behavioral data in real time. The purpose of this study was to examine EMA compliance, identify factors predicting compliance, assess criterion validity of, and reactivity to, using EMA in a workplace intervention study. Methods: Forty-five adults (91.1% female, 39.7 [9.6] y) were recruited for a workplace standing desk intervention. Participants received 5 surveys each day for 5 workdays via smartphone application. EMA items assessed current position (sitting/standing/stepping). EMA responses were time matched to objectively measured time in each position before and after each prompt. Multilevel logistic regression models estimated factors influencing EMA response. Cohen kappa measured interrater agreement between EMA-reported and device-measured position. Reactivity was assessed by comparing objectively measured sitting/standing/stepping in the 15 minutes before and after each EMA prompt using multilevel repeated-measures models. Results: Participants answered 81.4% of EMA prompts. Differences in compliance differed by position. There was substantial agreement between EMA-reported and device-measured position (kappa = .713; P <.001). Following the EMA prompt, participants sat 0.87 minutes more than before the prompt (P <.01). Conclusion: The use of EMA is a valid assessment of position when used in an intervention to reduce occupational sitting and did not appear to disrupt sitting in favor of the targeted outcome.
机译:背景:生态瞬时评估(EMA)是实时收集行为数据的方法。本研究的目的是审查EMA遵从性,确定预测合规性,评估标准有效性和反应性的因素,在工作场所干预研究中使用EMA。方法:招募了四十五名成人(91.1%的女性,39.7 [9.6] y)进行工作场所常设桌面干预。参与者每天收到5个调查,每天通过智能手机应用程序进行5个工作日。 EMA项目评估了当前位置(坐/站/踩)。 EMA响应是与每次提示之前和之后的每个位置的客观测量时间匹配的时间。多级逻辑回归模型影响EMA响应的估计因素。科恩·卡普布测得EMA报告和设备测量位置之间的Irensider协议。通过使用多级重复测量模型在每次EMA提示之前和之后的15分钟内比较,通过比较坐姿/站立/踩踏来评估反应性。结果:参与者回答了81.4%的EMA提示。遵守差异的差异差异不同。在EMA报告和设备测量位置之间存在大量协议(Kappa = .713; P <.001)。在EMA提示之后,与会者比提示前的0.87分钟(P <.01)。结论:在干预才能减少职业坐期时,EMA的使用是对职位的有效评估,并且似乎并未扰乱有利于目标结果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号