The estimation scale of the daily pedometry of senior students

Keywords: motor activity, step locomotions, daily locomotions, life quality


Background and Study Aim: To create the estimation scale of the daily pedometry of senior students with different levels of motor activity. To determine the dependence of students' life quality on the volume of step locomotions.  Material and methods. The students of Irkutsk National Research Technical University (Irkutsk, Russia) (n = 235: females - n = 78, males - n = 157: 19-20 years old) participated in the study. The daily pedometry of students for 7 days was studied. The number of daily steps was recorded by Simple Design Ltd application for smartphones. The sigma deviation method was used to develop an individual daily pedometry estimation scale. The daily pedometry scale was developed based on the distribution of this characteristic by 5 sigma classes ("low", "below average", "average", "above average", "high"). Students' life quality was studied using a Russian-language version of SF-36 (Short Form Health Survey). The survey presents the characteristics of physical (PH), mental (MH) and general (GH) health. The answers were estimated in points (0-100). Results. Most students have an "average" level of step locomotions. 10% of males and about 8% of females have "above average" or "high" pedometry level. This group of students is actively engaged in sports activities. 4.8% of males and 7.5% of females have a "low" pedometry level. In this group of students, motor activity is limited only by locomotions related to educational and household activities. Students with "high" and "above average" pedometry levels have the highest values of life quality indicators. Such students are in a safe zone of non-communicable diseases. The “low” level of daily step locomotions is considered as a predictor of insufficient physical activity, low general and mental health of students. Conclusions. The sigma deviation method allows distributing any population of people by the number of daily locomotions into five sigma classes. The level of daily step locomotions can be considered as a marker of physical activity, general and mental health. This approach makes it possible to refer a person to a safe health zone or a risk group of non-communicable diseases. The results of the study can be used in the recommendations for improving the students’ life quality. It is also recommended to use our recommendations to increase students' self-motor activity during their university studies.


Download data is not yet available.

| Abstract views: 61 | PDF Downloads: 47 |

Author Biographies

Mikhail M. Kolokoltsev, Irkutsk National Research Technical University; Doctor of Medical Sciences, Prof.;  Irkutsk National Research Technical University; Irkutsk, Russia.
Elena V. Romanova, Altay State University; Candidate of philosophical  Sciences, Associate Prof.; Department of Physical Culture, Altay State University; Barnaul, Russia.
Wladyslaw Jagiello, Gdansk University of Physical Education and Sport; Doctor of Sciences, Prof.; Department Combat Sports and Personal Training, Gdansk University of Physical Education and Sport;  Gdańsk, Poland.
Tetiana S. Yermakova, Kharkiv State Academy of Design and Arts;  Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences, assistant prof., Kharkiv State Academy of Design and Arts; Kharkiv, Ukraine.


1. Bouchard C, Shephard RJ. Physical activity, fitness and health. The model and key concepts. In: Bouchard C, Shephard RJ, Stephens T. (red.). Physical Activity, Fitness and Health. International proceedings and consensus statement. Human Kinetics Publishers. Champaign; 1994. P. 77–88.

2. Tretiakov AA, Drogomeretsky VA, Agoshkov VA. Analysis of the relationship between the level of somatic health of students and motor activity. Contemporary Science and Education Problems, 2014; 3:279–285. (in Russian)

3. Basset D, Fitzhugh E, Heaz G, Erwin P, Frederick G, Wolff D. et al. Estimated energy expenditures for school-based policies and active living. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2013;44(2):108–113.

4. Gerber M, Ludyga S, Mucke M, Colledge F, Brand S, Puhse U. Low vigorous physical activity is associated with increased adrenocortical reactivity to psychosocial stress in students with high stress perceptions. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 2017;80:104–113.

5. Olafsdottir AS, Torfadottir JE, Arngrimsson SA. Health Behavior and Metabolic Risk Factors Associated with Normal Weight Obesity in Adolescents. PLoS ONE, 2016;11 (8).

6. Hortigüela Alcalá D, Pérez-Pueyo Á, Moncada-Jiménez J. An analysis of the responsibility of physical education students depending on the teaching methodology received. Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 2015;15(2): 202–207.

7. Yang CB, Dong MK. A Study of the correlation between teachers’ teaching styles and students’ participation motivation in the physical education. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 2017;16(2):199–206.

8. Zhuravlev IV. Student health: sociological analysis. Moscow: Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences; 2012. (In Russian)

9. Carlos Eduardo Da Costa. Motivational goals orientation in Physical Education classes of elementary education. Carlos Marco. Journal of Physical Education and Sport (JPES), 2015;15(2): 167–171.

10. Moy B, Renshaw I, Davids K. The impact of nonlinear pedagogy on physical education teacher education students’ intrinsic motivation. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 2016; 21(5): 517–538.

11. Pengpid S, Peltzer K. Sedentary Behaviour, Physical Activity and Life Satisfaction, Happiness and Perceived Health Status in University Students from 24 Countries. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2019; 16:2084.

12. Kolpakova EM. Motor activity and its effect on human health. Health, Physical Culture and Sports, 2018; 1 (8):94–109. (In Russian)

13. Liy VI, Rumba OG, Gorlov AA. Criteria and methods for investigating human motor activity (review). Theory and Practice of Physical Culture, 2013; 10:99–104. (In Russian)

14. Chan CB, Ryan D AJ, Tudor-Locke C. Health benefits of a pedometer-based physical activity intervention in sedentary workers. Prev Med, 2004;39(6):1215–1222.

15. Wyatt HR, Peters JC, Reed GW, Grunwald GK, Barry M, Thompson H, Jones J, Hill JO. Using electronic step counters to increase lifestyle physical activity: Colorado on the MoveTM. JPAH, 2004; 1:178–188.

16. Mynarski W, Rozpara M, Królikowska B, Puciato D, Graczykowska B. Qualitative and quantitative aspects of physical activity. Studies and Monographs, 313. Opole University of Technology; 2012. (In Polish)

17. Eakin EG, Mummery K, Reeves MM, Lawler SP, Schofield G, Marshall AJ, et al. Correlates of pedometer use: Results from a community-based physical activity intervention trial (10,000 Steps Rockhampton). Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act, 2007;4:31.

18. Vilensky MYa. The basics of a student 's healthy lifestyle. Role of physical culture in health. In: The physical culture of a student. Moscow: Gardarika; 2001. P.131–174. (In Russian)

19. Savkin VV, Zyryanova VA, Pakhomova NV, Savkin NV, Trapeznikov MV. Systemic approach, indicators of health and usual motor activity in students during the performance of the valeological (health) program. Perm Medical Journal, 2011; 6 (28): 120–128. (In Russian)

20. Kiselev VI, Sharapova PH, Kulikov VP. Physical education classes and individual motor activity of students. Theory and practice of physical culture, 1991; 6:21–23. (In Russian)

21. Dragic OA, Sidorov KA. Analysis of indicators of the component composition of the body of students of URFO universities. Sports, sports and educational and patriotic activities in universities: innovations in solving topical problems: materials of the IV International Scientific and Practical Conference. Tyumen: TIU, 2018. P.85–89. (In Russian)

22. Steinerdt SV, Achkas EE. Dynamics of morphometric indicators of young men of different generations. In: Problems of Modern Human Morphology: Materials of the International Scientific and Practical Conference Dedicated to the 80th Anniversary of Professor B. A. Nikitiuk (September 25–27, 2013). Moscow; 2013. P.152–153. (In Russian)

23. Tikhvin SB, Khrushchev SV. Children's sports medicine. The management for doctors. The 2nd prod. Moscow: Medicine; 1991. River 560. (in Russian)

24. Kuchma BP, Skoblin NA. Information value of methods of assessment of physical development of children and adolescents. In: Baranova AA, Kuchma VR. (ed.) Physical development of children and adolescents of the Russian Federation. Moscow: Pediatr publishing house; 2013. P.64–68. (In Russian)

25. Prusakov VM, Prusakov AB. Criteria for assessing the medical and environmental situation based on the sigmal deviation method. Hygiene and Sanitation, 2013; 1:72–76. (in Russian)

26. Conroy R. Estimation of ten-year risk of fatal cardiovascular disease in Europe: the SCORE project. European Heart Journal, 2003;24:987–1003.

27. Yunatskaya TA, Turchaninova MS, Kozubenko OV, Turchaninov DV. Psychological component of quality of life related to health, teenagers and students of Omsk region. Basic Research, 2014;7:170–173.

28. Ware JE, Snow KK, Kosinski M, Gandek B. SF-36 Health Survey. Manual and interpretation guide. The Health institute, New England Medical Center. Boston: Mass; 1993.

29. Fiona C. Bull, Tahlia S. Maslin and Timothy Armstrong. Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ): Nine Country Reliability and Validity Study. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 2009; 6:790–804.

30. Godin AM. Statistics: textbook. Moscow: Dashkov and K; 2012. (In Russian)

31. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. JAMA, 2013;310:2191.

32. Sokolova EVE. Analysis of motor activity of SPBGUP students during the school year. Physical Education and Sports Training, 2019; 1 (27): 35–42. (in Russian)

33. Kudyashev NH, Bolgov VN, Kudyasheva AN. Application of interfacing tables for analysis of students "attitude to physical culture in educational-mass and sports work of the university. Basic researches, 2015;2(18):4004–4007. (In Russian)

34. Gorеlov AA, Gavrishova EV. Comparative study of the nature of motor activity and mental efficiency of students of different specializations. Bereginya; 2013. (In Russian)

35. Jagiello W, Wolska B, Sawczyn S, Dornowski M. The similarity of training experience and morphofunctional traits as prediction criteria of the sports level in subsequent stages of long-term women's judo training. Archives of Budo. 2014;10:201–210.

36. Denisova GS. Dependence of body weight of students of special department of Altay State University on the nature of nutrition and optimal level of motor activity. Health, Physical Culture and Sports, 2019;1(12):127–152. (In Russian)

37. Golovin SM, Romanova EV. Sports self-determination of university students. Health, Physical Culture and Sports, 2017;3(6): 3–12. (In Russian)

38. Savko EI, Hojempo SV. Student youth and their attitudes to physical culture, and healthy lifestyles. Health, Physical Culture and Sports, 2018;4 (11): 62–76. (In Russian)

39. Spakov AI, Krumina LP, Mischenko AN, Obelevsky AG, Pavluti OV. Self-assessment of students 'motor activity and their attitude towards physical education organization (comparison of research data in 2005 and 2015). In: Health-saving technologies and systems: psycho-pedagogical and medical-biological aspects, materials of the II International Scientific and Practical Conference on May 20, 2016. Baranovichi; 2016. P.215–219. (in Russian)

40. Zhang Z, Chen B, Chen W. The mediating effect of perceived health on the relationship between physical activity and subjective well-being in Chinese college students. Journal of American College Health, 2019:1–8.

41. Xu F, Wang X, Xiang D, Wang Z, Ye Q, Ware RS. Awareness of knowledge and practice regarding physical activity: A population-based prospective, observational study among students in Nanjing, China. PLoS ONE, 2017;12:e0179518.

42. Zurita-Ortega F, Badicu G, Chacón-Cuberos R, Castro-Sánchez M. Motivational Climate and Physical Activity: A Multigroup Analysis in Romanian and Spanish University Students. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2019;16:2013.

43. Potop V, Timnea OC, Stanescu M. Improving sports technique of stretched Gienger salto on uneven bars based on biomechanical indicators. Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods, 2017;7(8):472–480.

44. Potop V, Timnea O, Stănescu M. Correlative analysis of the kinematic and dynamic characteristics of sports technique used in acrobatic elements and performances achieved by junior gymnasts in balance beam events. Conference proceedings, Volume 17. Informatics, Geoinformatics and Remote Sensing, 2017; 21: P. 231–238.

45. Kalina RM, Jagiello W. Non-apparatus, Quasi-apparatus and Simulations Tests in Diagnosis Positive Health and Survival Abilities. In: Ahram T, editor. Advances in Human Factors in Sports, Injury Prevention and Outdoor Recreation, Ahfe 2017. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. 2018; 603: 121–128.

46. Klimczak J, Kalina RM, Jagiello W. Fun forms of martial arts in diagnosing and reducing aggressiveness - mental effects of a one-day course for Polish animators of sport. In: Kalina RM, editor. 1st World Congress on Health and Martial Arts in Interdisciplinary Approach (HIMA), Location: Univ Sch Phys Educ Wroclaw, Czestochowa, Poland; 2015. P. 187–189.

47. Gorеlov AA, Tretiakov AA. Nervous-emotional tension and methods to increase students ‘resilience to its effects. Belhorod: CPI Politicra; 2012. (In Russian)

48. Kozlov AV, Pasko GV. Optimal motor regime as a mandatory factor of healthy lifestyle of students. In: Sports, sports and educational and patriotic activities in universities: innovations in solving topical problems: materials of the IV International Scientific and Practical Conference. Tyumen: TIU; 2018. P. 111–113. (In Russian)

49. Myltasova OV, Konstantinov AJ. Combining work and study: Do funds always justify the goals? Modern scientific research and innovation, 2016; 6:11–20. (In Russian)

50. Korkin EV, Krysyuk OB. Impact of Nordic walking classes on performance and quality of life of students of physical education university. Physical Culture: Education, Training, 2017; 1:51–53. (in Russian)

51. Sidorov DG. Problems of formation of healthy-oriented process of education in the university. Problems and prospects for the development of physical culture in Russia and near-abroad countries: a collection of scientific articles. Barnaul; 2010. P. 225–230. (In Russian)

52. Zelezinsky GA, Korenko PN, Kravchenok MA, Sallum AI. Quality of life for medical students and clinical residents. Clinical medicine, 2005;8:29–31. (In Russian)

53. Krasnozhon SV. Motor activity as a criterion of health level. Physical culture. Sport. Tourism. Motor Recreation, 2017; 2 (1): 46–52. (In Russian)

54. Stamatakis E. Screen based entertainment time, all-cause mortality and hospital events follow-up. J. of the Amer. College of Cardiology, 2011; 57(3):292–299.

55. Oyeyemi AL, Oyeyemi AY, Adegoke BO, Oyetoke FO, Aliyu HN, Aliyu SU, et al. The short international physical activity questionnaire: cross-cultural adaptation, validation and reliability of the Hausa language version in Nigeria. BMC Med Res Methodol, 2011;11:156.

56. Kolokoltsev MM, Ambartsumyan RA. Characteristics of valeological installation in young men Pripikayalia. Problems of Modern Pedagogical Education, 2018; 62(4):96–98.

57. Jamali A, Tofangchiha S, Jamali R, Nedjat S, Jan D, Narimani A, et al. Medical students’ health-related quality of life: roles of social and behavioural factors. Med Educ, 2013;47:1001–12.

58. Voltmer E, Rosta J, Aasland OG, Spahn C. Studyrelated health and behavior patterns of medical students: a longitudinal study. Med Teach., 2010;32(10):422–428.

59. Hagstromer M, Ainsworth BE, Pekka O, Sjostrom M. Comparison of a Subjective and an Objective Measure of Physical Activity in a Population Sample. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 2010;7: 541–550.
How to Cite
Kolokoltsev M, Romanova E, Jagiello W, Yermakova T. The estimation scale of the daily pedometry of senior students. Physical education of students. 2020;24(2):100-8.