Cited by 144Physical Activity and HealthHealth and Medical StudiesObesity, Physical Activity, Diet

Differences in Physical Activity Prevalence and Trends From 3 U.S. Surveillance Systems: NHIS, NHANES, and BRFSS

Carlson, Susan A., Densmore, Dianna, Fulton, Janet E., Yore, Michelle M., Kohl, Harold W.·2009·Journal of Physical Activity and Health

Abstract

Background: Three U.S. surveillance systems—National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), and Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS)—estimate physical activity prevalence. Methods: Survey differences were examined qualitatively. Prevalence estimates by sex, age, and race/ethnicity were assessed for comparable survey periods. Trends were examined from NHIS 1998 to 2007, NHANES 1999 to 2006, and BRFSS 2001 to 2007. Results: Age-adjusted prevalence estimates appeared most similar for NHIS 2005 (physically active: 30.2%, inactive: 40.7%) and NHANES 2005 to 2006 (physically active: 33.5%, inactive: 32.4%). In BRFSS 2005, prevalence of being physically active was 48.3% and inactive was 13.9%. Across all systems, men were more likely to be active than women; non-Hispanic whites were most likely to be active; as age increased, overall prevalence of being active decreased. Prevalence of being active exhibited a significant increasing trend only in BRFSS 2001 to 2007 (P < .001), while prevalence of being inactive decreased significantly in NHANES 1999 to 2006 (P < .001) and BRFSS 2001 to 2007 (P < .001). Conclusions: Different ways of assessing physical activity in surveillance systems result in different prevalence estimates. Before comparing estimates from different systems, all aspects of data collection and data analysis should be examined to determine if comparisons are appropriate.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1123/jpah.6.s1.s18

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A recent direct comparison of NHANES, BRFSS, and NHIS physical activity data revealed different prevalence estimates ranging from 30% to 48%, making comparisons across studies difficult.

    “However, a recent direct comparison of NHANES, BRFSS, and NHIS physical activity data revealed different prevalence estimates for physical activity across the different surveillance systems, ranging from 30% to 48%,23 making comparisons across studies difficult.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Carlson, S. A., Densmore, D., Fulton, J. E., Yore, M. M., & Kohl, H. W.
Affiliations
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
  • Orlando Health (US)
Venue
Journal of Physical Activity and Health
Published
2009-01
Volume
6
Issue
s1
Pages
S18-S27
ISSN
  • 1543-3080 (ISSN-L)
  • 1543-5474
OpenAlex
W2132305200
Cited by
144
References
19
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 6
FWCI
5.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Physical Activity and Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health and Medical Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Keywords
physical activity prevalence, physical inactivity, NHIS, NHANES, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, physical activity trends, sex differences, racial and ethnic differences, age differences, physical activity measurement
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Ethnicity, Female, Health Surveys, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nutrition Surveys, Population Surveillance, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, United States, Health Behavior, Exercise, Prevalence, Linear Models, Age Distribution, Sex Distribution, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, Healthy People Programs

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review