Reilly JJ, Andrew R, Abdeta C, Azevedo LB, Farias NA, Barak S, Bardid F, Bizzozero-Peroni B, Brazo-Sayavera J, Cagas JY, Chelly MS, Christiansen LB, Djordjic VD, Draper CE, El-Hamdouchi A, Fares EJ, Gába A, Hesketh KD, Hossain MS, Huang W, Jáuregui A, Juvekar SK, Kuzik N, Larouche R, Lee EY, Levi S, Liu Y, Löf M, Loney T, Gil JFL, Mäestu E, Manyanga T, Martins C, Mendoza-Muñoz M, Morrison SA, Munambah N, Mwase-Vuma TW, Naidoo R, Ocansey R, Okely AD, Oluwayomi A, Paudel S, Poh BK, Ribeiro EH, Silva DAS, Shahril MR, Smith M, Staiano AE, Standage M, Subedi N, Tanaka C, Tang HK, Thivel D, Tremblay MS, Uzicanin E, Vlachopoulos D, Webster EK, Widyastari DA, Zembura P, and Aubert S
Background: The actions required to achieve higher-quality and harmonised global surveillance of child and adolescent movement behaviours (physical activity, sedentary behaviour including screen time, sleep) are unclear., Objective: To identify how to improve surveillance of movement behaviours, from the perspective of experts., Methods: This Delphi Study involved 62 experts from the SUNRISE International Study of Movement Behaviours in the Early Years and Active Healthy Kids Global Alliance (AHKGA). Two survey rounds were used, with items categorised under: (1) funding, (2) capacity building, (3) methods, and (4) other issues (e.g., policymaker awareness of relevant WHO Guidelines and Strategies). Expert participants ranked 40 items on a five-point Likert scale from 'extremely' to 'not at all' important. Consensus was defined as > 70% rating of 'extremely' or 'very' important., Results: We received 62 responses to round 1 of the survey and 59 to round 2. There was consensus for most items. The two highest rated round 2 items in each category were the following; for funding (1) it was greater funding for surveillance and public funding of surveillance; for capacity building (2) it was increased human capacity for surveillance (e.g. knowledge, skills) and regional or global partnerships to support national surveillance; for methods (3) it was standard protocols for surveillance measures and improved measurement method for screen time; and for other issues (4) it was greater awareness of physical activity guidelines and strategies from WHO and greater awareness of the importance of surveillance for NCD prevention. We generally found no significant differences in priorities between low-middle-income (n = 29) and high-income countries (n = 30) or between SUNRISE (n = 20), AHKGA (n = 26) or both (n = 13) initiatives. There was a lack of agreement on using private funding for surveillance or surveillance research., Conclusions: This study provides a prioritised and international consensus list of actions required to improve surveillance of movement behaviours in children and adolescents globally., Competing Interests: Declarations. Author Contributions: J.J.R. and S.A. were responsible for the original concept and study design. Original concept/ design/ methods were developed by the study leadership group (J.J.R., S.A., C.A., R.A., J.Y.C., R.L., S.K.L., N.M., A.D.O., C.T., M.T., D.A.W.). The replies from all the participants in the first round of the Delphi determined the content and format of the second round of the survey. J.J.R. and R.A. led the analysis and take responsibility for the integrity of the data. J.J.R. and S.A. drafted the manuscript. All authors: completed both rounds of the Delphi survey, reviewed and contributed significantly to the editing and critical reviewing of the manuscript, contributed significantly to interpretation of results, stated their formal approval of the manuscript, and stated their formal agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work. All authors met al ICMJE authorship criteria. Funding: This study had no specific funding. Reilly and Andrew were funded by the Scottish Funding Council at the time the study was carried out. Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. Availability of Data: The anonymised data from survey rounds 1 and 2 are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Consent for Publication: Not applicable. Consent to Participate: All participants gave electronic informed written consent and were aware that participation was voluntary, and they could withdraw at any point during the survey without any consequences. Ethics Approval: The study was approved by the University of Strathclyde, Glasgow Scotland, School of Psychological Sciences and Health Research Ethics Committee (reference 03.05.10.2022)., (© 2024. The Author(s).)