Digital citizen science for ethical monitoring of youth physical activity frequency: Comparing mobile ecological prospective assessments and retrospective recall.

Ibrahim, Sheriff Tolulope; Patel, Jamin; Katapally, Tarun Reddy · PLOS Digit Health · 2025

cross_sectional · Level IV

Where this comes from

Abstract

Physical inactivity is a leading risk factor for mortality worldwide. Understanding youth patterns of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) is essential for addressing non-communicable diseases. Digital citizen science approaches, using citizen-owned smartphones for data collection, offer an ethical and innovative method for monitoring MVPA. This study compares the frequency of MVPA reported by youth using retrospective surveys and mobile ecological prospective momentary assessments (mEPAs) to explore the potential of digital citizen science for physical activity (PA) surveillance. Youth (N = 808) were recruited from Saskatchewan, Canada, between August and December 2018. Sixty-eight participants (ages 13-21) provided complete data on retrospective surveys (International Physical Activity Questionnaire, Simple Physical Activity Questionnaire, Global Physical Activity Questionnaire) and prospective mEPAs. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests compared retrospective and prospective MVPA frequencies, while negative binomial regression analysis examined associations between contextual factors and MVPA. Significant differences were found in the frequency of MVPA reported via retrospective surveys versus mEPAs (p < 0.000). Prospective MVPA was associated with family and friend support, having drug-free friends, part-time employment, and school distance, while retrospective MVPA frequency was associated with school and strength training. Digital citizen science, utilizing mEPAs, can provide more accurate and timely data on youth MVPA. With increasing smartphone access and digital literacy, mEPAs represent a promising method for developing effective and personalized MVPA recommendations for youth. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution, as the sample represents a small subset of youth, limiting generalizability to other youth populations.