Merging self-reported with technically sensed data for tracking mobility behavior in a naturalistic intervention study. Insights from the GISMO study.
Martin LoidlPetra StutzMaria Dolores Fernandez Lapuente de BattreChristian SchmiedBernhard ReichPhilipp BohmNorbert SedlacekJosef NiebauerDavid NiederseerPublished in: Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports (2021)
Sound exposure data are central for any intervention study. In the case of utilitarian mobility, where studies cannot be conducted in controlled environments, exposure data are commonly self-reported. For short-term intervention studies, wearable devices with location sensors are increasingly employed. We aimed to combine self-reported and technically sensed mobility data, in order to provide more accurate and reliable exposure data for GISMO, a long-term intervention study. Through spatio-temporal data matching procedures, we are able to determine the amount of mobility for all modes at the best possible accuracy level. Self-reported data deviate ±10% from the corrected reference. Derived modal split statistics prove high compliance to the respective recommendations for the control group (CG) and the two intervention groups (IG-PT, IG-C). About 73.7% of total mileage was travelled by car in CG. This share was 10.3% (IG-PT) and 9.7% (IG-C), respectively, in the intervention groups. Commuting distances were comparable in CG and IG, but annual mean travel times differ between x ¯ = 8,458 min (σ = 6,427 min) for IG-PT, x ¯ = 8,444 min (σ = 5,961 min) for IG-C, and x ¯ = 5,223 min (σ = 5,463 min) for CG. Seasonal variabilities of modal split statistics were observable. However, in IG-PT and IG-C no shift toward the car occurred during winter months. Although no perfect single-method solution for acquiring exposure data in mobility-related, naturalistic intervention studies exists, we achieved substantially improved results by combining two data sources, based on spatio-temporal matching procedures.