@ 1438-8871 %I Gunther Eysenbach %V 14 %N 5 %P 123% T基于web的体育活动测量系统的验证使用双标记水%A Namba,Hideyuki %A Yamaguchi,Yukio %A Yamada,Yosuke %A tokusima,Satoru %A Hatamoto,Yoichi %A Sagayama,Hiroyuki %A木村，Misaka %A Higaki,Yasuki %A Tanaka,Hiroaki +福冈大学体育与健康科学学院，8-19-1 Nanakuma, Jonan-ku，福冈，814-0180，日本，81 92 871 6631 ext 6759，hnanba@fukuoka-u.ac.jp %K体力活动%K能量消耗%K双标签水%K日本%D 2012 %7 25.09.2012 %9原始论文%J J医学互联网资源%G英文%X背景:在线或基于web的测量系统已被提出作为收集体力活动数据的方便方法。我们开发了两个基于Web的体育活动系统——24小时体育活动记录Web (24hPAR Web)和7天回忆Web (7daysRecall Web)。目的:检验两种基于网络的双标记水(DLW)体力活动测量系统的有效性。方法:我们评估了20名年龄在25至61岁的个体的24hPAR WEB和7daysRecall WEB的有效性。电子邮件分发的顺序和随后完成的两个基于web的测量系统是随机的。每种测量工具都使用了一周。每周使用DLW方法评估参与者的活动能量支出(AEE)和总能量支出(TEE)，并与使用基于web的系统估计的各自能量支出进行比较。结果:24hPAR WEB法测定的平均AEE为3.90 (SD 1.43) MJ, DLW法测定的平均AEE为3.67 (SD 1.48) MJ。两种方法AEE的Pearson相关性为r = .679 (P < .001)。 The Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement ranged from –2.10 to 2.57 MJ between the two methods. The Pearson correlation for TEE between the two methods was r = .874 (P < .001). The mean AEE was 4.29 (SD 1.94) MJ using the 7daysRecall WEB and 3.80 (SD 1.36) MJ by the DLW method. The Pearson correlation for AEE between the two methods was r = .144 (P = .54). The Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement ranged from –3.83 to 4.81 MJ between the two methods. The Pearson correlation for TEE between the two methods was r = .590 (P = .006). The average input times using terminal devices were 8 minutes and 10 seconds for the 24hPAR WEB and 6 minutes and 38 seconds for the 7daysRecall WEB. Conclusions: Both Web-based systems were found to be effective methods for collecting physical activity data and are appropriate for use in epidemiological studies. Because the measurement accuracy of the 24hPAR WEB was moderate to high, it could be suitable for evaluating the effect of interventions on individuals as well as for examining physical activity behavior. %M 23010345 %R 10.2196/jmir.2253 %U //www.mybigtv.com/2012/5/e123/ %U https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2253 %U http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23010345

map