Skip to main content

Table 3 Results from Round 1, Round 2 and Round 3 for the Activity Patterns Reporting Framework

From: Defining and reporting activity patterns: a modified Delphi study

Statement

Round 1 (n = 20)

Round 2 (n = 16)

Round 3 (n = 12)

Important (%)

Not important (%)

Important (%)

Not important (%)

Important (%)

Not important (%)

The activity intensity (or intensities) and/or posture(s) being investigated should be clearly defined and reported

95%

0%

100%

0%

-

-

An explanation of how specific activity pattern components are defined/derived should be clearly reported

100%

0%

93.4%

0%

-

-

A rationale for examining activity bout(s) and/or transitions should be reported, where applicable

85%

0%

75%

6.3%

100%

0%

The way in which activity bouts and/or transition data are defined and analysed should be clearly reported, where applicable

95%

0%

93.8%

0%

-

-

The time period(s) and/or days of interest should be clearly defined, where applicable.

100%

0%

93.8%

0%

-

-

A rationale for the choice of any specific time period(s) and/or days of interest should be clearly provided.2

85%

0%

75%

6.3%

  

The outcome variables for the time period(s) and/or days should be clearly reported

95%

0%

93.8%

0%

-

-

The method used to assess activity patterns should be clearly reported

100%

0%

100%

0%

-

-

The processing of activity patterns data should be clearly reported1

-

-

100%

0%

-

-

A rationale for choosing and defining specific activity pattern components should be reported, where applicable1

-

-

87.5%

0%

-

-

  1. *Percentage of participants reporting ‘Very important’ or ‘Important’
  2. ** Percentage of participants reporting ‘Unimportant’ or ‘Not at all important’
  3. 1 New statement in Round 2
  4. 2 Statement missing from Round 3 survey due to technical error