CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 649Physical Activity and HealthContext-Aware Activity Recognition SystemsBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention

Utility of Pedometers for Assessing Physical Activity: Convergent Validity

Tudor-Locke, Catrine, Williams, Joel E., Reis, Jared P., Pluto, Delores·2002·Sports Medicine
DOI 10.2165/00007256-200232120-00004
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Valid assessment of physical activity is important to researchers and practitioners interested in surveillance, screening, programme evaluation and intervention. The validity of an assessment instrument is commonly considered its most important attribute. Convergent validity is the extent to which an instrument's output is associated with that of other instruments intended to measure the same exposure of interest. A systematic review of the literature produced 25 articles directly relevant to the question of convergent validity of pedometers against accelerometers, observation, and self-reported measures of physical activity. Reported correlations were pooled and a median r-value was computed. Pedometers correlate strongly (median r = 0.86) with different accelerometers (specifically uniaxial accelerometers) depending on the specific instruments used, monitoring frame and conditions implemented, and the manner in which the outputs are expressed. Pedometers also correlate strongly (median r = 0.82) with time in observed activity. Time in observed inactivity correlated negatively with pedometer outputs (median r = -0.44). The relationship with observed steps taken depended upon monitoring conditions and speed of walking. The highest agreement was apparent during ambulatory activity (running, walking) or during sitting (when both observation and pedometers would register few steps taken). There was consistent evidence of reduced accuracy during slow walking. Pedometers correlate moderately with different measures of energy expenditure (median r = 0.68). The relationship between pedometer outputs and energy expenditure is complicated by the use of many different direct and indirect measures of energy expenditure and population samples. Concordance with self-reported physical activity (median r = 0.33) varied depending upon the self-report instrument used, individuals assessed, and how pedometer outputs are expressed (e.g. steps, distance travelled, energy expenditure). Pedometer output has an inverse relationship with reported time spent sitting (r = -0.38). The accumulated evidence herein provides ample support that the simple and inexpensive pedometer is a valid option for assessing physical activity in research and practice.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2165/00007256-200232120-00004

Cites

76 of 76 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Tudor-Locke, C., Williams, J. E., Reis, J. P., & Pluto, D.
Affiliations
  • Arizona State University (US)
  • University of South Carolina (US)
ORCID
Venue
Sports Medicine
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2002
Volume
32
Issue
12
Pages
795-808
ISSN
0112-1642 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2165/00007256-200232120-00004
OpenAlex
W1992741091
Cited by
649
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 35 · 2014: 38 · 2013: 42 · 2012: 38
FWCI
2.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Sports Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Context-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Keywords
pedometers, physical activity measurement, convergent validity, accelerometer, self-reported physical activity, energy expenditure, sitting time, step count, slow walking
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Child, Energy Metabolism, Female, Humans, Ergonomics, Locomotion, Male, Middle Aged, Monitoring, Physiologic, Motor Activity, Physical Fitness, Sensitivity and Specificity, Reproducibility of Results, Exercise

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