Position statement: Testing physical condition in a population - How good are the methods?

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Standard

Position statement : Testing physical condition in a population - How good are the methods? / Jørgensen, Torben; Andersen, Lars B.; Froberg, Karsten; Maeder, Urs; von Huth Smith, Lisa; Aadahl, Mette.

I: European Journal of Sport Science, Bind 9, Nr. 5, 01.12.2009, s. 257-267.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Harvard

Jørgensen, T, Andersen, LB, Froberg, K, Maeder, U, von Huth Smith, L & Aadahl, M 2009, 'Position statement: Testing physical condition in a population - How good are the methods?', European Journal of Sport Science, bind 9, nr. 5, s. 257-267. https://doi.org/10.1080/17461390902862664

APA

Jørgensen, T., Andersen, L. B., Froberg, K., Maeder, U., von Huth Smith, L., & Aadahl, M. (2009). Position statement: Testing physical condition in a population - How good are the methods? European Journal of Sport Science, 9(5), 257-267. https://doi.org/10.1080/17461390902862664

Vancouver

Jørgensen T, Andersen LB, Froberg K, Maeder U, von Huth Smith L, Aadahl M. Position statement: Testing physical condition in a population - How good are the methods? European Journal of Sport Science. 2009 dec. 1;9(5):257-267. https://doi.org/10.1080/17461390902862664

Author

Jørgensen, Torben ; Andersen, Lars B. ; Froberg, Karsten ; Maeder, Urs ; von Huth Smith, Lisa ; Aadahl, Mette. / Position statement : Testing physical condition in a population - How good are the methods?. I: European Journal of Sport Science. 2009 ; Bind 9, Nr. 5. s. 257-267.

Bibtex

@article{d944dd2a6c4c41c28b84626cbdacaef7,
title = "Position statement: Testing physical condition in a population - How good are the methods?",
abstract = "A poor physical condition - expressed as physical inactivity and poor physical fitness - is associated with the development of chronic diseases and premature death. Our aim was to evaluate the methods currently available for measuring physical activity and physical fitness in the general population. Physical activity is determined by duration, frequency, and intensity and derives from many different domains, making it difficult to assess over long periods and no feasible general criterion measure exists. Both objective and subjective methods are available. Of the objective methods, accelerometry is the most attractive technology, and is well enough developed for general use in large populations. The advantage of accelerometry is that it is not dependent on the memory of the individual, but its main disadvantage is that it grossly underestimates energy expenditure, due to the lack of registration of certain activities. This may be overcome to a certain extent by combining accelerometry with heart rate monitoring, although this still does not measure activity in different domains. Of the subjective methods, self-report questionnaires are inexpensive and easy to administer. Many questionnaires have been developed, but we require (1) consensus on which measures to use for validation and (2) further development of internationally standardized questionnaires for use in different settings and to address different scientific questions. Many questionnaires correlate well with biological markers and development of chronic diseases, but subjective measurement will always entail a certain degree of misclassification. Furthermore, unstructured physical activity such as housework and gardening may be subject to recall bias. No method appears better to any other, and the choice of instrument will depend on the research question being asked. Future research should combine information from both objective and subjective methods. Physical fitness comprises several components, including cardiorespiratory endurance and muscle strength and endurance. Direct measurement of oxygen consumption is the criterion measure for cardiorespiratory endurance. As regards muscle strength and endurance, only test-retest reliability is available. Hand-held dynamometers greatly facilitate field testing for maximal isometric muscle strength assessment, while force plate measurements can be used for the lower extremities. For endurance, simple tests such as push-ups and sit-ups are reliable.",
keywords = "Epidemiology, Physical activity, Physical fitness",
author = "Torben J{\o}rgensen and Andersen, {Lars B.} and Karsten Froberg and Urs Maeder and {von Huth Smith}, Lisa and Mette Aadahl",
year = "2009",
month = dec,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/17461390902862664",
language = "English",
volume = "9",
pages = "257--267",
journal = "European Journal of Sport Science",
issn = "1746-1391",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis",
number = "5",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Position statement

T2 - Testing physical condition in a population - How good are the methods?

AU - Jørgensen, Torben

AU - Andersen, Lars B.

AU - Froberg, Karsten

AU - Maeder, Urs

AU - von Huth Smith, Lisa

AU - Aadahl, Mette

PY - 2009/12/1

Y1 - 2009/12/1

N2 - A poor physical condition - expressed as physical inactivity and poor physical fitness - is associated with the development of chronic diseases and premature death. Our aim was to evaluate the methods currently available for measuring physical activity and physical fitness in the general population. Physical activity is determined by duration, frequency, and intensity and derives from many different domains, making it difficult to assess over long periods and no feasible general criterion measure exists. Both objective and subjective methods are available. Of the objective methods, accelerometry is the most attractive technology, and is well enough developed for general use in large populations. The advantage of accelerometry is that it is not dependent on the memory of the individual, but its main disadvantage is that it grossly underestimates energy expenditure, due to the lack of registration of certain activities. This may be overcome to a certain extent by combining accelerometry with heart rate monitoring, although this still does not measure activity in different domains. Of the subjective methods, self-report questionnaires are inexpensive and easy to administer. Many questionnaires have been developed, but we require (1) consensus on which measures to use for validation and (2) further development of internationally standardized questionnaires for use in different settings and to address different scientific questions. Many questionnaires correlate well with biological markers and development of chronic diseases, but subjective measurement will always entail a certain degree of misclassification. Furthermore, unstructured physical activity such as housework and gardening may be subject to recall bias. No method appears better to any other, and the choice of instrument will depend on the research question being asked. Future research should combine information from both objective and subjective methods. Physical fitness comprises several components, including cardiorespiratory endurance and muscle strength and endurance. Direct measurement of oxygen consumption is the criterion measure for cardiorespiratory endurance. As regards muscle strength and endurance, only test-retest reliability is available. Hand-held dynamometers greatly facilitate field testing for maximal isometric muscle strength assessment, while force plate measurements can be used for the lower extremities. For endurance, simple tests such as push-ups and sit-ups are reliable.

AB - A poor physical condition - expressed as physical inactivity and poor physical fitness - is associated with the development of chronic diseases and premature death. Our aim was to evaluate the methods currently available for measuring physical activity and physical fitness in the general population. Physical activity is determined by duration, frequency, and intensity and derives from many different domains, making it difficult to assess over long periods and no feasible general criterion measure exists. Both objective and subjective methods are available. Of the objective methods, accelerometry is the most attractive technology, and is well enough developed for general use in large populations. The advantage of accelerometry is that it is not dependent on the memory of the individual, but its main disadvantage is that it grossly underestimates energy expenditure, due to the lack of registration of certain activities. This may be overcome to a certain extent by combining accelerometry with heart rate monitoring, although this still does not measure activity in different domains. Of the subjective methods, self-report questionnaires are inexpensive and easy to administer. Many questionnaires have been developed, but we require (1) consensus on which measures to use for validation and (2) further development of internationally standardized questionnaires for use in different settings and to address different scientific questions. Many questionnaires correlate well with biological markers and development of chronic diseases, but subjective measurement will always entail a certain degree of misclassification. Furthermore, unstructured physical activity such as housework and gardening may be subject to recall bias. No method appears better to any other, and the choice of instrument will depend on the research question being asked. Future research should combine information from both objective and subjective methods. Physical fitness comprises several components, including cardiorespiratory endurance and muscle strength and endurance. Direct measurement of oxygen consumption is the criterion measure for cardiorespiratory endurance. As regards muscle strength and endurance, only test-retest reliability is available. Hand-held dynamometers greatly facilitate field testing for maximal isometric muscle strength assessment, while force plate measurements can be used for the lower extremities. For endurance, simple tests such as push-ups and sit-ups are reliable.

KW - Epidemiology

KW - Physical activity

KW - Physical fitness

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79961023313&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/17461390902862664

DO - 10.1080/17461390902862664

M3 - Journal article

AN - SCOPUS:79961023313

VL - 9

SP - 257

EP - 267

JO - European Journal of Sport Science

JF - European Journal of Sport Science

SN - 1746-1391

IS - 5

ER -

ID: 242208360