Results of workshop work groupWork Group I: Measures of the Food and Physical Activity Environment: Instruments
Introduction
Accurate measurement is a cornerstone of science, with improvements in knowledge intricately dependent on solid instrumentation that is reliable (consistent and repeatable); valid (measuring what it purports to measure); and sensitive to meaningful change. Emerging research areas, such as the study of environmental influences on eating and physical activity, present an opportunity to learn from measurement missteps in other research fields. Such missteps have included limited psychometric testing of instruments,1 lack of theoretical or conceptual models underlying measurement,2 and the need to balance appropriately thorough instrumentation in order to capture complicated constructs with needless proliferation of instruments to assess the same or similar enough constructs.3
The 2007 Measures of the Food and Built Environment workshop, sponsored by the NIH and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, included four work groups tasked to address various aspects of measures development in food and physical activity environments.4 One of the work groups addressed instrumentation to assess food and physical activity environments. This paper summarizes current problems in instrumentation that emerged from the work group's discussion and provides recommendations on how to begin to address or prevent potential problems. In doing so, we hope to shape a more efficient overall approach to instrumentation that leads to better measurement, greater comparability across studies, and more definitive estimates of association and effect on related behaviors and health.
Section snippets
Challenges
Current core challenges facing investigators making decisions about food- and physical activity–environment instrumentation include when and whether to develop new instruments, the importance of sensitivity to community needs, preferences, and changes in the food and physical activity environment, and the scale or grain of instruments. Each challenge is briefly discussed.
Recommendations
In response to the core issues described above, the Instrumentation Work Group recommends making information about food- and physical activity–environment instruments more readily available, creating incentives for sharing instruments and associated measurement data, increasing community and research collaborations, and establishing surveillance for key constructs.
References (7)
- et al.
Measuring the health environment for physical activity and nutrition among youth: a review of the literature and applications for community initiatives
Prev Med
(2000) - et al.
Measuring the food and physical activity environments: shaping the research agenda
Am J Prev Med
(2009) - et al.
Nutrition Environment Measures Survey in stores (NEMS-S): development and evaluation
Am J Prev Med
(2007)
Cited by (38)
Development and validity of a virtual street walkability audit tool for pedestrian route choice analysis—SWATCH
2018, Journal of Transport GeographyBuilt environment assessment: Multidisciplinary perspectives
2016, SSM - Population HealthCitation Excerpt :A growing body of research indicates that local availability of healthy foods influences what people eat (Caspi, Sorensen, Subramanian, & Kawachi, 2012; Kamphuis et al., 2006) and may help explain racial and income disparities in healthy food consumption, obesity rates, and conditions such as diabetes and heart disease (Glanz et al., 2005). Nutrition experts have developed tools to measure the nutrition, or food environment (Ohri-Vachaspati & Leviton, 2010; Saelens & Glanz, 2009). One of the most widely used, and adapted, tools is the Nutrition Environment Measures Survey (NEMS), an observational audit tool that assesses availability of healthful foods, prices, and promotion.
Comparison of field and online observations for measuring land uses using the Microscale Audit of Pedestrian Streetscapes (MAPS)
2016, Journal of Transport and HealthPhysical activity and healthy eating environmental audit tools in youth care settings: A systematic review
2015, Preventive MedicineCitation Excerpt :This is critical as information gathered from such tools is being used to inform policy makers' decisions regarding the impact or effectiveness of environmental characteristic interventions and to, in turn, formulate future strategies regarding the promotion of physical activity and healthy eating habits among youth. Saelens and Glanz (2009) put forward a set of guidelines for reporting on newly developed instruments. These guidelines include: (1) the rationale and justification for developing the tool and how it differs from existing tools, (2) the construct measured by the tool, (3) reliability and validity of the tool, (4) detailed protocols on how to use the tool, (5) scoring and scaling of the tool, (6) modifications made to the tool, (7) the setting, geographical area, and population or environments where the tool was used, and (8) ways to access the tool.