Search

Additional file 1: Contains a flowchart of participants in the study (Figure 1), additional details on the exposure (Methods 1), a graph of our causal assumptions (Figure 2), additional details on compositional data analysis (Methods 2), the outcome distributions (Figures 3 and 4), base model results (Table 1), and sensitivity analyses results (Results 1 and 2).

Background: The prominence of sedentary behavior research in health science has grown rapidly. With this growth there is increasing urgency for clear, common and accepted terminology and definitions. Such standardization is difficult to achieve, especially across multi-disciplinary researchers, practitioners, and industries. The Sedentary Behavior Research Network (SBRN) undertook a Terminology Consensus Project to address this need.Method: First, a literature review was completed to identify key terms in sedentary behavior research. These key terms were then reviewed and modified by a Steering Committee formed by SBRN. Next, SBRN members were invited to contribute to this project and interested participants reviewed and provided feedback on the proposed list of terms and draft definitions through an online survey. Finally, a conceptual model and consensus definitions (including caveats and examples for all age groups and functional abilities) were finalized based on the feedback received from the 87 SBRN member participants who responded to the original invitation and survey.Results: Consensus definitions for the terms physical inactivity, stationary behavior, sedentary behavior, standing, screen time, non-screen-based sedentary time, sitting, reclining, lying, sedentary behavior pattern, as well as how the terms bouts, breaks, and interruptions should be used in this context are provided.Conclusion: It is hoped that the definitions resulting from this comprehensive, transparent, and broad-based participatory process will result in standardized terminology that is widely supported and adopted, thereby advancing future research, interventions, policies, and practices related to sedentary behaviors.

Reliability and SRD are important prerequisites for the correct interpreta- tion of spirometric data, which indicate to the clinician whether or not a genuine and real change has occurred. [...]the aim of this study has been to check the reliability of spirometric tests during the menstrual cycle phases and to investi- gate if spirometric variables are modified across the menstrual cycle. On the basis of the percentage of smallest real difference observed in the present study, the size of the relative change (SRD%) should exceed 6.5 % for FEV1, FVC and PEF and 8.3 % for MVV, to indicate a real change for a single individual. [...]these measurements could be used to detect real changes for a single individual following an intervention program, re- gardless of the menstrual cycle phase.