The 24-hour activity cycle (24HAC) is a new paradigm for studying activity behaviors in relation to health outcomes. This approach captures the interrelatedness of the daily time spent in physical activity (PA), sedentary behavior (SB), and sleep. We illustrate and compare the use of three popular approaches, namely isotemporal substitution model (ISM), compositional data analysis (CoDA), and latent profile analysis (LPA) for modeling outcome associations with the 24HAC. We apply these approaches to assess an association with a cognitive outcome, measured by CASI item response theory (IRT) score, in a cohort of 1034 older adults (mean [range] age = 77 [65-100]; 55.8% female; 90% White) who were part of the Adult Changes in Thought (ACT) Activity Monitoring (ACT-AM) sub-study. PA and SB were assessed with thigh-worn activPAL accelerometers for 7 days. We highlight differences in assumptions between the three approaches, discuss statistical challenges, and provide guidance on interpretation and selecting an appropriate approach. ISM is easiest to apply and interpret; however, the typical ISM model assumes a linear association. CoDA specifies a non-linear association through isometric logratio transformations that are more challenging to apply and interpret. LPA can classify individuals into groups with similar time-use patterns. Inference on associations of latent profiles with health outcomes need to account for the uncertainty of the LPA classifications which is often ignored. The selection of the most appropriate method should be guided by the scientific questions of interest and the applicability of each model's assumptions. The analytic results did not suggest that less time spent on SB and more in PA was associated with better cognitive function. Further research is needed into the health implications of the distinct 24HAC patterns identified in this cohort.
翻译:24小时活动周期(24HAC)是研究与健康结果相关的活动行为的新模式。这一方法反映了在运动模式(PA)、定居行为(SB)和睡眠方面每天花费的时间的相互关联性。我们演示并比较了三种流行方法的使用情况,即:异时替代模型(ISM)、构成数据分析(CoDA)和潜在剖面分析(LPA),用于模拟与24HAC之间的结果协会模式。我们采用这些方法评估与认知结果的联系,以CASI项目响应理论(IRT)的评分来衡量。在1034名老年人(平均[距离]年龄=77[65-100];固定行为(SB)和睡眠方面,这种方法反映了日常时间的关联性。IPSMA最不易被应用和解释;但是,在思想(ACT)活动监测(ACT-AM)活动监测(ACT-AM)子研究中,90% White)成人变化模式的一部分。对PA和SB公司进行7天的模拟评估。我们强调三种方法在假设中的差异,通过相关挑战性挑战性挑战性挑战性挑战性挑战性挑战性挑战性挑战性挑战性解释,并指导解释。IMA IMA IMA IMA IMA IMA IMA IMA IMA IM IM 的每一个的每一个的每一个的每一个的模型更需要更需要更需要更更更更更更更需要更需要更需要更需要更需要更细级分类。