↓ Skip to main content

Validity of instruments to measure physical activity may be questionable due to a lack of conceptual frameworks: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, October 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Validity of instruments to measure physical activity may be questionable due to a lack of conceptual frameworks: a systematic review
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, October 2011
DOI 10.1186/1477-7525-9-86
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elena Gimeno-Santos, Anja Frei, Fabienne Dobbels, Katja Rüdell, Milo A Puhan, Judith Garcia-Aymerich, the PROactive consortium

Abstract

Guidance documents for the development and validation of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) advise the use of conceptual frameworks, which outline the structure of the concept that a PRO aims to measure. It is unknown whether currently available PROs are based on conceptual frameworks. This study, which was limited to a specific case, had the following aims: (i) to identify conceptual frameworks of physical activity in chronic respiratory patients or similar populations (chronic heart disease patients or the elderly) and (ii) to assess whether the development and validation of PROs to measure physical activity in these populations were based on a conceptual framework of physical activity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 2 2%
United Kingdom 2 2%
Spain 2 2%
United States 2 2%
Canada 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Japan 1 1%
Switzerland 1 1%
Unknown 86 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 20%
Researcher 17 17%
Student > Master 12 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Other 25 26%
Unknown 10 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 11%
Sports and Recreations 8 8%
Psychology 6 6%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 13 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 October 2011.
All research outputs
#14,072,496
of 22,653,392 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,115
of 2,153 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,533
of 132,696 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#4
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,653,392 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,153 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 132,696 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.