Conference Agenda
Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).
|
Daily Overview |
| Session | |
|
WR1_2_3: Abstract presentations: Active Living Across Settings: Work, Travel and Everyday Life Location: White room 1 Session Chair: Ilkka Väänänen | |
    | |
3:00pm - 3:10pm
Delphi Consensus on Active Travel Terminology Classification and Measurement in Sport Science Research 1: University of Bayreuth, Germany; 2: Deakin University, Australia; 3: Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany Background Active travel describes non‑motorized, human‑powered movement undertaken as part of everyday journeys. Although increasingly relevant within sport science, and well‑established in transport and public health research, substantial inconsistencies remain in how active travel is defined, categorised, and measured. This study aims to develop a consensus‑based framework for active travel terminology, definition, categorisation, and measurement to improve conceptual clarity and methodological comparability. Methods A scoping review following PRISMA guidelines was conducted. A systematic SportDiscus search yielded 3179 records. Inclusion criteria were peer‑reviewed articles in German or English, full‑text availability, all age groups, all publication years, and human populations only. After screening, 39 studies met the criteria. At the time of submission, the review was completed and the Delphi questionnaire prepared. The Delphi process consists of a minimum of two rounds in which experts evaluate and refine terminology, definitions, categorisation structures, and measurement approaches. By the time of the conference, both Delphi rounds will have been completed unless additional rounds are required to achieve consensus. Results The review identified 17 different terminologies and 53 separate definitions of active travel. Measurement approaches ranged from subjective self‑reports to objective and observational methods, while categorisation systems showed extensive heterogeneity. Findings will be synthesised using the FITT‑D (Herold et a., 2025) framework at the time of the conference. Conclusions A consensus‑based framework will enhance conceptual clarity and support morehigh‑quality, comparable research methods in active travel, strengthening evidence for its contribution to health‑enhancing physical activity and non-communicable diseases prevention. Support/Funding Source No external funding. | |
