Dear Label_Name,

Greetings! I hope you are well.

I am writing on behalf of an international publishing house, Science and Education Publishing, USA (http://www.sciepub.com).

Science and Education Publishing (SciEP) is a multidisciplinary open access publisher of Journals covering the fields of Science, Technology and Medicine. All SciEP publications are subject to high-quality peer review, editorial and production processes and are freely available online.

Welcome to the April, 2013 edition of SciEP newsletter, providing monthly summaries of articles on science & education related topics of interest to scientist and professionals. The mission of our journals is to provide an open access forum for publishing new findings on issues pertinent to scientific and academic field. We also invite you to submit original research papers, review articles, short reports, or case studies are considered for publication in our Multidisciplinary Journals.

American Journal of Public Health Research
DOI: 10.12691/ajphr-1-1-3

The Implementation of a Tele-Homecare System with Service Oriented Architecture and HL7 Message Transmission Standard
Ching-Sung Wang

American Journal of Medical and Biological Research
DOI: 10.12691/ajmbr-1-1-2

The Influence of Ethanol on Pyruvate Kinases Activity in Vivo, in Vitro, in Silico
Lelevich Sergey Vladimirovich, Khrustalev Vladislav Victorovich, Barkovsky Eugene Victorovich, Shedogubova Tatyana Aleksandrovna

American Journal of Medical Sciences and Medicine
DOI: 10.12691/ajmsm-1-1-1

Clinical and Histological Features in Wegener Granulomatosis
Li Cavoli Gioacchino, Passantino Rita, Bono Luisa, Tortorici Calogera, Ferrantelli Angelo, Giammarresi Carlo, Rotolo Ugo

American Journal of Infectious Diseases and Microbiology
DOI: 10.12691/ajidm-1-1-2

The Curse of Lymphatic Filariasis: Would the Continual Use of Diethylcarbamazine Eliminate this Scourge in Papua New Guinea?
Anne Lanham, Lillian Mwanri

We have released issues of some journals on February 2013.
American Journal of Public Health Research
American Journal of Medical Sciences and Medicine
American Journal of Medical and Biological Research
American Journal of Pharmacological Sciences
American Journal of Clinical Medicine Research
American Journal of Nursing Research
American Journal of Cancer Prevention
American Journal of Medicine Studies
American Journal of Infectious Diseases and Microbiology
American Journal of Cardiovascular Disease Research
American Journal of Biomedical Research
American Journal of Mechanical Engineering
American Journal of Microbiological Research
Journal of Preventive Medicine
American Journal of Food and Nutrition
American Journal of Hypertension Research
American Journal of Sports Science and Medicine
Journal of Cancer Research and Treatment
American Journal of Zoological Research
Journal of Biomedical Engineering and Technology
American Journal of Microbiological Research
Biomedical Science and Engineering

We are pleased to announce that submissions are now being accepted for peer review for all the journals across all our subject areas in SciEP.

Please submit your manuscript via our online submission system:
http://www.sciepub.com/author/signin

To unsubscribe from our mailing list, please click on the following link: unsubscribe

I am looking forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,

David Rain
Email:join@sciepub.com
Science and Education Publishing (http://www.sciepub.com)

The University Faculty Physical Activity Inventory (UFPAI): A Preliminary Assessment of Physical Activity among Faculty at a Private University

Kristianna M. Altamirano*, Brent M. Peterson, Kelsey L. Miller, Jacob K. Gardner

Department of Kinesiology and Health Science, Biola University, La Mirada, USA

Abstract: Physical activity (PA) is decreasing, with the work environment being particularly influential on reduction in PA. However, physically active lifestyles meeting or exceeding 150 minutes/week have been linked to reductions in multiple deleterious chronic health conditions. University educators are inundated with University work as well as promotional challenges that may act as barriers to achieving recommended daily levels of PA. Currently, very few research studies have evaluated PA among University faculty. Thus, the purpose of this exploratory investigation was to evaluate self-reported levels of PA among faculty members at Biola University. Eligible survey respondents (N = 138) were men (n = 72, 48.7 ± 11.7 years of age, 179.3 ± 8.5 centimeters in height, 86.3 ± 16.1 kilograms in weight, and an average body mass index (BMI) of 26.8 ± 4.6 kg/m²) and women (n = 66, 44.8 ± 11.7 years of age, 166.2 ± 8.2 centimeters in height, 69.3 ± 13.2 kilograms in weight, and an average body mass index (BMI) of 25.1 ± 4.8 kg/m²) faculty members from Biola University. Participants completed the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ), using the SurveyMonkey® platform. Total daily sitting time and metabolic equivalent (MET) minute activity-specific (leisure, household, occupational, and transport) were calculated. One way ANOVAs revealed significant (p = 0.02) main effects for job title and total minutes of PA per week. The post-hoc analysis revealed that adjuncts were significantly more physically active than full professors. Although the only statistically significant differences were between adjuncts and full professors, we observed a downward trend in median physical activity. Independent measures t-tests revealed a significant (p = 0.004) difference between men and women for total minutes of PA per week. Women were significantly more physically active than men. Only 5.1% of faculty reported below 150 min of cumulative PA within a week. Total median PA for faculty was 3,133.5 MET*min/week. 52.9% of faculty reported a high categorical score above 3,000.0 MET*min/week of activity with a median of 4,757.0 MET*min/week. Of the four domains, leisure activity had the greatest median at 1,169.5 MET*min/week and active transport had the least at 462.0 MET*min/week. Faculty surveyed in this study exceeded the ACSM minimum weekly recommendations for PA and lower faculty ranks were the most active.

Keywords: active, lifestyle, academia, walking, leisure, activity template

Citation: Kristianna M. Altamirano, Brent M. Peterson, Kelsey L. Miller, Jacob K. Gardner, The University Faculty Physical Activity Inventory (UFPAI): A Preliminary Assessment of Physical Activity among Faculty at a Private University. Journal of Physical Activity Research, 3 (1). 41-46. January 2018. doi:10.12691/jpar-3-1-7

1. Introduction

On a global scale, physical activity (PA) is declining. It is estimated that in the United States alone, less than 5% of adults are achieving at least 30 minutes of PA per day [1]. However, physically active lifestyles meeting or exceeding 150 minutes of PA per week have been linked to positive improvements in mental health [2] and reductions in conditions such as type-II diabetes, some types of cancer, cardiovascular disease, premature mortality, chronic debilitating diseases, and multi-morbidity [2,3,4,5,6]. Some investigators have reported the gravity of the situation is of pandemic scale; necessitating the action of public health practitioners to increase action [7,8]. The most recent economic burdens of physical inactivity and major non-communicable illness provide additional support for the severe classification of decreases in PA. Ding et al. [9] found that even under the most conservative estimates, physical inactivity may negatively influence global health systems upwards of $54 billion annually. Furthermore, inactivity-related deaths have been associated with an annual loss of approximately $14 billion in productivity and 13 million disability-adjusted life years in 2013 [9]. The economic burden, premature mortality, and chronic debilitating diseases linked to physical inactivity have been well establish and necessitate a call for action [10]. It is reasonable to suggest that these multifaceted societal/behavioral changes have a major impact on the decreases in currently observed physical activity.

Physical activity, by definition, is inclusive of activities that may include occupation, transportation, yard work, household activities, as well as leisure components [11,12]. The American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) recommends a minimum of 150 minutes of at least moderate and vigorous PA each week. One of the nation’s health goals according to Healthy People 2020 [13] is to increase moderate and vigorous physical activity among all persons. Some of the factors that may limit physical activity and influence sedentary behavior may include the workplace environment, technology, sitting time, perceived lack of time, socioeconomic status, occupational background and level of education achieved [14,15,16,17,18]. Shaw and Spokane [19] found the odds of engaging in PA was greater for people with more education than less education at any point in time and the inverse relationship between age and PA decreased as education level increased. University faculty have degrees ranging from baccalaureate to doctorates, therefore, they should have at least some sort of awareness about the recommended levels of PA required for healthy living. Yet, faculty, are often pressured by University workload and promotional demands that achievement of recommended daily PA might be inhibited. Kirk and Rhodes [20] reported that untenured, full-time assistant professors in Canada reported reductions in PA by approximately 31% as they transitioned from new hire into full-time employment. While working in academia, faculty have an influential role in the lives of college-age adults and should aim to be leaders in the promotion of positive health behaviors. Sparling [21] noted positive PA behaviors adopted while in college will most likely be maintained beyond graduation. Our group surmised that highly educated faculty may actually epitomize the embodiment of positive health behaviors specifically because the nature of their profession requires active consumption and translation of current research literature. However, very few studies have evaluated and quantified the adherence to recommended PA levels among University faculty members. Therefore, the purpose of this exploratory investigation was to evaluate self-reported PA among faculty members at a private University in Southern California. The investigators hypothesized that participant PA levels would meet or exceed recommended levels of PA in the United States and higher faculty ranks would demonstrate a lower amounts of PA.

2. Methods

2.1. Participants

Of the 472 faculty who received the survey, 158 completed it, which equates to a 33.5% response rate. However, following exclusion of outlying or missing data (discussed in subsequent paragraphs) 138 participant surveys were considered eligible for analysis. Participants were men (n = 72, 48.7 ± 11.7 years of age, 179.3 ± 8.5 centimeters in height, 86.3 ± 16.1 kilograms in weight, and an average body mass index (BMI) of 26.8 ± 4.6 kg/m²) and women (n = 66, 44.8 ± 11.7 years of age, 166.2 ± 8.2 centimeters in height, 69.3 ± 13.2 kilograms in weight, and an average body mass index (BMI) of 25.1 ± 4.8 kg/m²) faculty members from Biola University; a private Christian University in La Mirada, CA. Participants’ educational attainment and job titles are reported in Table 1. Since this is an initial evaluation of exploratory nature, power analyses and estimated effect sizes were not conducted. Participants were recruited via a University mass email listing.

Table 1. IPAQ Respondent Demographic and Descriptive Characteristics

2.2. Theoretical Framework

The Health Belief Model (HBM) guided the design of this study. Constructs that were most pertinent were susceptibility, cues to action, and seriousness as potential influencers on individual capacity to screen, act, or aim to increase physical activity [22]. These HBM constructs influenced the direction of this study in a few ways, 1) physical inactivity is increasing globally, 2) physical inactivity has been linked to a host of debilitating health conditions including cancer 3) academic demands often require a substantial amount of sedentary behavior, and 4) educated faculty charged with educating the next generation of scholars may (or may not) be as physically inactive as the general population, and may or may not be providing a tangible example of living a healthy lifestyle. By exploring and examining self-reported levels of physical activity among faculty members, future interventions may be developed to compare this sample to the general population and develop specifically-targeted interventions to either maintain or increase physical activity among faculty.

2.3. Data Collection

This study followed guidelines and was approved by the Biola University Protection of Human Rights in Research Committee (PHRRC, [F17-016_JB]). A link to electronic questionnaires were sent out via email over the course of two weeks. Weekly emails were sent to remind faculty of the assessment. Detailed study explanations, time required to complete the survey, and proposed usage of data were sent via email with a digital link to begin the assessment. All respondents who consented to participate completed the long-form IPAQ, which was adapted for online completion using the SurveyMonkey® platform. The IPAQ has been designed for use with both male and female, and youth and middle-aged adults (ages 15-69 years). The long version is composed of 27 items that cover a breadth of PA domains. The long-form IPAQ has been reported as having very good test-retest reliability (rs of 0.8), reasonable concurrent validity (rs of 0.67) and fair criterion related validity (rs of 0.33) when assessing all domains of PA and sedentary behaviors across 12 countries [11]. Total daily sitting time and activity-specific MET-minutes per week (leisure, household, occupational, and transport) were calculated using the IPAQ protocol for scoring of assessments [23].

2.4. Scoring and Data Handling

All exploratory data are reported as either means (± SD) and/or medians (± IQR). Preliminary data frequency and descriptive analyses were conducted to visually represent the raw dataset to address possible inconsistencies or anomalous numerical occurrences that may arise. Data exploration procedures were then conducted following initial observations of anomalous occurrences. Exploration procedures revealed extreme outlying or missing data occurrences which were subsequently excluded from analysis. Data from the long form of the IPAQ were summated by each domain segment of PA for the estimation of time spent in totality during occupational, transport, leisure, household, and time spent sitting per week (Table 2). The IPAQ Metabolic Equivalence (MET-minute) values have been based on estimated values obtained from the 2011 compendium of physical activities [23]. One MET is equivalent to 3.5 ml of O₂ consumed per kg of body mass per minute of time [25]. Following established categorization by IPAQ protocols, MET values that have been pre-assigned for specific components are as follows: walking (3.3 METs), moderate inside chores (3.0 METs), moderate work and leisure PA (4.0 METs), moderate yard chores (4.0 METs), vigorous yard chores (5.5 METs), cycling (6.0 METs), and vigorous work and leisure PA (8.0 METs). The total minutes of PA for each domain sub component was multiplied by the MET equivalent then summed to find a Domain MET min/week total and the MET min/week for type of PA (Walking, Moderate and Vigorous). Moderate activities included biking for transport, yard and household chores, and other light tasks during work and leisure time. Vigorous PA was calculated for difficult tasks during work or leisure such as running, fast swimming and heavy lifting. The IPAQ also included 3 questions on sedentary behavior. Although respondents in this study completed the survey, not all question categories were completed by the total N and thus, are reported with the number of respondents that completed each category and the individual domain in Table 1.

Table 2. Self-reported Physical Activity

3. Statistical Analysis

A priori Kolmgorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk tests were used to determine normality for sex and job title (independent variables), as well as total minutes of PA per week and total MET minutes of PA per week (depended variables). For each analysis significance (p < .05) was reached, thereby violating the assumption of normality for multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVA). Therefore, a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted on job title, total minutes of PA per week, and total MET minutes per week. In the appearance of significant main effects, Tukey post hoc pairwise comparisons were employed. An independent measure t-test was run on (sex) total minutes of PA per week and total MET minutes per week. All procedures were performed on the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 21 (SPSS, Armonk, NY). A familywise error rate of 0.05 was utilized to determine statistical significance.

4. Results

One way ANOVAs revealed significant (p = 0.02) main effects for job title and total minutes of PA per week. The post-hoc analysis revealed that adjuncts were significantly more physically active than full professors (Figure 1). Although the only statistically significant differences were between adjuncts and full professors, we observed a downward trend in median physical activity. What this suggests is that as faculty advanced in job title PA decreased (Table 2). Faculty with doctoral degrees reported engaging in approximately 2,298 MET*min/week (515 min/week), which was the lowest recorded total physical activity score (Table 2). Independent measures t-tests revealed a significant (p = 0.004) difference between men and women for total minutes of PA per week. Women were significantly more physically active than men (Figure 2).

The median total physical activity including all domains for faculty was 3,595.3 MET*min/week (720.0 min/week). Only 5.1% of faculty reported below 150 min of cumulative PA within a week. Of the four domains, leisure activity had the greatest median at 1717.2 MET*min/week (210 min/week) while active transport had the least at 602.2 MET*min/week (140 min/week) (Table 2). Median moderate physical activity levels were greater 1050.0 MET*min/week (250 min/week) than walking and vigorous activity 1440 MET*min/week (180 min/week) (Table 3). Seventy-three University faculty (52.9%) were in the “high” categorical ranking (4,757.0 MET*min/week) having recorded PA exceeding 3,000.0 MET*min/week (Table 4). Respondents (89.9%) completed questions about sitting time and reported median sitting time of approximately 325.7 min/day.

Figure 1. Job title comparisons and total self-reported physical activity from all IPAQ domains. Physical activity data are mean ± SD. * indicates significant differences (p < 0.05)

Figure 2. Sex comparisons total self-reported physical activity. Physical activity are mean ± SD. * indicates significant differences (p < 0.05)

Table 3. Total Scores of Physical Activities

Table 4. Total Physical Activity Categorical Score

5. Discussion

Until recently, very few studies have highlighted the PA levels among faculty members working in the University setting. Some investigations highlighted in this study suggested that work demands and the promotional challenges were potential barriers to achieving ACSM recommended levels of PA. Yet, in this investigation the results revealed that although PA followed a step-wise decrease as faculty members gained in professional stature, only 5.1% were not reportedly meeting at least 150 minutes of PA per week. This suggests that regardless of positional stature, faculty sampled in this study were mostly physically active according to ACSM minimum recommendations. These job title-related decreases in PA may be, in part, explained as a factor of age, as it often takes many years to achieve the status of full professor. However in this investigation we did not adjust for age. Multiple investigators have reported on the aspects of the inverse relationship between age and PA levels [26,27,28,29,30]. Although declines in PA were observed in this study, faculty were still reporting PA values above ACSM minimum recommendations. The investigators of this study surmised that because the nature of the University is such that active consumption of current literature is a requirement of the job, it is a requirement to engage with current literature on a daily basis. By doing so, faculty members may, to some extent, inevitably interact with health-related information.

It was also hypothesized that faculty members inherently play a leadership role as mentors in the lives of students because of the nature of the job itself. Although not assessed in this study, perhaps faculty at Biola University experience greater levels of self-efficacy because the institution is supportive and promotes a more-relational cultural interaction between faculty and students. Whipple, Kinney, and Kattenbraker [31] reported that in a survey of the maintenance of physical activity behavior among faculty and staff at three universities, those with higher levels of self-efficacy and plans to participate in exercise were more likely to actually be physically active. However, there may be more societally-related factors that may impact a person’s health-related behavior besides high self-efficacy and the ability to make plans. For example, Bot et al. [32] examined the impact of lifestyle behaviors and social networking on health outcomes in a sample of 50 participants at risk for cardiovascular or metabolic conditions, and 170 members of their social circles. The investigators concluded that those with close and densely packed relational circles were found to be more physically active. Perhaps, components of faculty members’ social network are, in-part, better able to explain the higher than average amount of reported PA than self-efficacy alone. Or, it may be that a combination effect is occurring such that physically active faculty may have high self-efficacy, but may also have vibrant social lives that may cyclically increase self-efficacy and PA.

The majority of Faculty that were surveyed in this study exceeded recommended levels of PA per day at work, but also in their personal lives. As positive as the results appear, the possible impact of instrument-related issues, unfortunately, cannot be overlooked. The IPAQ questionnaire has been reported to be gaining in popularity and prevalence for it ease of use, but is a self-report measure, which, like other self-report measures of PA, may result in social desirability-skewed values that tend to be overestimated [33,34]. In addition, our group utilized the IPAQ as the sole assessment tool. Neil-Stramko et al., [35] however, examined self-reported PA via the IPAQ among physiotherapists, but also monitored PA directly with accelerometers. The investigators reported that although physiotherapists were a physically active group, there was some inflation of self-report PA compared to the accelerometer data. The investigators summarized that active physiotherapists were superbly positioned to lead by example in the promotion of recommended PA among their colleagues and patients. Similarly, university faculty are also uniquely positioned to do the same with the relational nature of academic interaction between faculty and students. Additionally, a bias toward high PA may be present within faculty self-reported PA. Future studies are necessary to evaluate demographic, behavioral, and philosophical motivating factors that have influenced the amount of reported PA in faculty at Biola University. Additionally, our group has planned follow-up studies to also investigate staff PA, but also PA among universities at differing geographic locations across the United States.

6. Conclusion

Aside from the observed step down relationship observed between faculty job title and reported PA, a majority of faculty members at Biola University were still exceeding ACSM recommendations for minimal levels of PA.

References

[1]   | Troiano, RP, Berrigan, D, Dodd, KW, et al. Physical activity in the united states measured by accelerometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc.2008; 40(1), 181-188.
[2]   | Conn, VS, Hafdahl, AR, Mehr, DR. Interventions to increase physical activity among healthy adults: meta-analysis of outcomes. Am J Public Health. 2011; 101(4), 751-758.
[3]   | Humphreys, BR, McLeod, L, Ruseski, JE. Physical activity and health outcomes: evidence from canada. Health Econ. 2014; 23(1), 33-54.
[4]   | Martinez-Gomez, D, Guallar-Castillon, P, Garcia-Esquina, E, et al. Physical activity and the effect of multimorbidity on all-cause mortality in older adults. Mayo Clin Proc. 2017; 92(3), 376-382.
[5]   | Miyauchi, M, Toyoda, M, Kaneyama, N, et al. Exercise therapy for management of type 2 diabetes mellitus: superior efficacy of activity monitors over pedometers. J Diabetes Res. 2016; ID:5043964, 1-7.
[6]   | Riebe, D, Franklin, BA, Thompson, PD, et al. Updating acsm’s recommendations for exercise pre-participation health screening. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2015; 47(8), 2473-2479.
[7]   | Kohl, HW, Craig, CL, Lambert, EV, et al. The pandemic of physical activity: global action for public health. Lancet. 2012; 380(9838), 294-305.
[8]   | Piggin, J, Bairner, A. The global physical inactivity pandemic: an analysis of knowledge production. Sport, Educ Soc. 2016; 21(2), 131-147.
[9]   | Ding, D, Lawson, KD, Kolbe-Alexander, TL, et al. The economic burden of physical inactivity: a global analysis of major non-communicable diseases. Lancet. 2016; 388(10051), 1311-1324.
[10]   | Kraus, WE, Bittner, V, Appel, L, et al. The national physical activity plan: a call to action from the american heart association. Circulation.2015; 131(21), 1932-1940.
[11]   | Craig, CL, Marshall, AL, Sjöström, M, et al. International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003; 35(8), 1318-1395.
[12]   | Watson, KB, Dai, S, Paul, P, et al. The attributable proportion of specific leisure-time physical activities to total leisure activity volume among us adults, national health and nutrition examination survey 1999-2006. J Phys Act Health. 2016; 13(11), 1192-1201.
[13]   | Healthy People 2020 [Internet]. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion [cited [2018 Feb]]. Available from: [https://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topics-objectives/topic/physical-activity].
[14]   | Bale, JM, Gazmararian, JA, Elon, L. Effect of the work environment on using time at work to exercise. Am J Health Promot. 2015; 29(6), 345-352.
[15]   | Droomers, M, Schrijvers, C, Mackenbach, J. Educational level and decreases in leisure time physical activity: predictors from the longitudinal GLOBE study. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2001; 55(8), 562-568. PMID: 11449013.
[16]   | Gray, PM, Murphy, MH, Gallagher, AM, et al. Motives and barriers to physical activity among older adults of different socioeconomic status. J Aging Phys Act. 2016; 24(3), 419-429.
[17]   | Manini, TM, Carr, LJ, King, AC, et al. Interventions to reduce sedentary behavior. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2015; 47(6), 1306-1310.
[18]   | Vndelanotte, C, Short, C, Rockloff, M, et al. How do different occupational factors influence total, occupational, and leisure-time physical activity? J Phys Act Health. 2015; 12(2), 200-207.
[19]   | Shaw, BA, Spokane, LS. Examining the association between education level and physical activity changes during early old age. J Aging Health. 2008; 20(7), 767-787.
[20]   | Kirk, MA, Rhodes, RE. Physical activity status of academic professors during their early career transition: an application of the theory of planned behavior. Psychol Health Med. 2012; 17(5), 551-564.
[21]   | Sparling, PB. College physical education: an unrecognized agent of change in combatting inactivity-related diseases. Perspect Biol Med. 2003; 46(4), 579-587.
[22]   | Champion, V. L., & Skinner, C. S. (2008). The Health Belief Model. In: Glanz K, Rimer BK, Viswanath K, eds. Health Behavior and Health Education. Theory, Research, and Practice. In (4th ed., pp. 45-65). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

[23]  
IPAQ Group. Guidelines for data processing and analysis of the international physical activity questionnaire: Short and long forms. [Internet]. The Group; 2005 [cited 2018 Feb]. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/file.PostFileLoader.html?id=5641f4c36143250eac8b45b7&assetKey=AS%3A294237418606593%401447163075131.

[24]   | Ainsworth, BE, Haskell, WL, Hermann, SD et al. 2011 compendium of physical activities: a second update of codes and MET values. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011; 43(8), 1575-1581.
[25]   | Heyward, VH, Gibson, AL. Advanced fitness assessment and exercise prescription (7th Ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
[26]   | Cairney, J, Veldhuizen, S, Kwan, M, et al. Biological age and sex-related declines in physical activity during adolescence. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2014; 46(4), 730-735.
[27]   | Dumith, SC, Gigante, DP, Domingues, MR, et al. Physical activity change during adolescence: a systematic review and pooled analysis. Int J Epedimiol. 2011; 40(3), 685-698.
[28]   | Kwan, MY, Cairney, J, Faulkner, GE, et al. Physical activity and other health-risk behaviors during the transition into early adulthood: a longitudinal cohort study. Am J Prev Med. 2012; 42(1), 14-20.
[29]   | Gorden-Larsen, P, Nelson, MC, Popkin, BM. Longitudinal physical activity and sedentary behavior trends: adolescence to adulthood. Am J Prev Med. 2004; 27(4), 277-283.
[30]   | Sallis, JF. Age-related decline in physical activity: a synthesis of human and animal studies. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2000; 32(9), 1598-1600. PMID: 10994911.
[31]   | Wipple, K, Kinney, J, Kattenbraker, M. Maintenance of physical activity among faculty and staff in university settings. Health Educ. 2008; 40(1), 21-28. ERICID: EJ863506.
[32]   | Bot, SD, Mackenbach, JD, Nijpels, G, et al. Association between social network characteristics and lifestyle behaviours in adults at risk of diabetes and cardiovascular disease. PLOS-One. 2016; 11(10), 1-14.
[33]   | Bauman, A, Ainsworth, BE, Bull, F, et al. Progress and pitfalls in the use of the international physical activity questionnaire (IPAQ) for adult physical activity surveillance. J Phys Act Health. 2009; 6(Suppl 1.), S5-S8.
[34]   | Adams, SA, Matthews, CE, Ebbeling, CB, et al. The effect of social desirability and social approval on self-reports of physical activity. Am J Epidemiol. 2005; 161(4), 389-398.
[35]   | Neil-Sztramko, SE, Ghayyur, A, Edwards, J, et al. Physical activity levels of physiotherapists across practice settings: a cross-sectional comparison using self-report questionnaire and accelerometer measures. Physiother Can. 2017; 69(2), 152-160.