Suppr超能文献

计步器在身体残疾人士中的有效性:系统评价。

Validity of pedometers in people with physical disabilities: a systematic review.

机构信息

Health and Use of Time Group, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia.

出版信息

Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013 Jun;94(6):1161-70. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2012.11.030. Epub 2012 Nov 29.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To review the literature for the criterion validity of pedometers for use in child and adult populations with physical disabilities.

DATA SOURCES

Academic Search Premier, ERIC, SPORTDiscus, MEDLINE, AMED, Scopus, CINAHL, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases, searched from inception to September 7, 2011.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies were included if they were peer-reviewed articles, included populations with physical disabilities, and reported primary data for pedometer validity in comparison with direct observation. A consensus approach was used to apply the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Of the 163 articles identified in the database searches (excluding duplicates), 7 studies met the inclusion criteria.

DATA EXTRACTION

The quality of the studies was assessed independently by 2 reviewers, using a purpose-designed appraisal tool, with a consensus approach used to settle disagreement. A single reviewer extracted data relating to sample size, participant characteristics, pedometer model, main variables tested, duration of tests, and method of direct observation.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The methodologic quality of the studies was generally high; however, there was a wide variation of population and methodology between studies. The correlation between pedometer step counts and directly observed step counts was moderate to excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient, .52-.87), and percent errors ranged from 0.5% to 24.7%. Secondary variables reported included the effect of speed of movement, pedometer placement, comparison of pedometer makes/models, and test-retest reliability.

CONCLUSIONS

Available evidence suggests that pedometers are valid for use in clinical and research settings in people with physical disabilities. Further research examining the validity of pedometers in less heterogeneous populations of people with disabilities is warranted to determine validity for specific disability populations and to determine optimal pedometer placement.

摘要

目的

综述计步器在身体残疾儿童和成人人群中应用的标准效度的文献。

资料来源

学术搜索高级版、ERIC、SPORTDiscus、MEDLINE、AMED、Scopus、CINAHL、Web of Science 和 EMBASE 数据库,从创建到 2011 年 9 月 7 日进行检索。

研究选择

如果研究是同行评议的文章,包括身体残疾人群,并报告了与直接观察相比计步器有效性的原始数据,则将其纳入研究。采用共识方法来应用纳入和排除标准。在数据库搜索(不包括重复项)中确定了 163 篇文章,其中有 7 项研究符合纳入标准。

资料提取

两位审阅者使用专门设计的评估工具独立评估研究的质量,采用共识方法解决分歧。一位审阅者提取了与样本量、参与者特征、计步器型号、主要测试变量、测试持续时间和直接观察方法有关的数据。

资料综合

研究的方法学质量通常较高;然而,研究之间的人群和方法存在广泛差异。计步器步数与直接观察步数之间的相关性为中度至极好(组内相关系数,.52-.87),误差百分比范围为 0.5%至 24.7%。报告的次要变量包括运动速度、计步器放置、计步器品牌/型号比较以及测试-重测可靠性的影响。

结论

现有证据表明,计步器在身体残疾人群的临床和研究环境中是有效的。需要进一步研究计步器在残疾人群中更为同质的人群中的有效性,以确定特定残疾人群的有效性,并确定最佳计步器放置位置。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验