Gender gap for accelerometry-based physical activity across different age groups in five Brazilian cohort studies

Objectives This study aims to evaluate the gender inequalities in accelerometer-based physical activity (PA) across different age groups using data from five Pelotas (Brazil) cohorts. Methods The data comes from four birth cohort studies, covering all live births in the urban area of Pelotas for each respective year (1982, 1993, 2004, and 2015), and the ‘ Como vai? ’ cohort study focusing on 60 years and above. Raw accelerometry data were collected on the non-dominant wrist using GENEActive/Actigraph devices and processed with the GGIR package. Overall PA was calculated at ages 1, 2, 4, 6, 11, 15, 18, 23, 30, and 60+ years, while moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) was calculated from six years onwards. Absolute (difference) and relative (ratio) gender inequalities were calculated and intersectionality between gender and wealth was also evaluated. Results The sample sizes per cohort ranged from 965 to 3462 participants. The mean absolute gender gap was 19.3 minutes (95%CI: 12.7; 25.9), with the widest gap at 18 years (32.9 minutes; 95%CI: 30.1; 35.7) for MVPA. The highest relative inequality was found in older adults (ratio 2.0; 95%CI 1.92 to 2.08). Our intersectionality results showed that the poorest men being the most active group, accumulating around 60 minutes more MVPA per day compared with the wealthiest women at age 18. Conclusion Men were more physically active than women in all ages evaluated. PA gender inequalities start at an early age and intensifies in transition periods of life. Relative inequalities were marked among older adults. What is already known on this topic Gender inequalities in physical activity have been reported globally, but most of the evidence is focused in adolescents and young adults. The literature lacks studies on children and older adults. What this study adds We present gender inequalities in accelerometer-based physical activity across several age groups, from 1 year olds to older adults. How this study might affect research, practice or policy Ou study provides a comprehensive description of gender inequalities, identifying key age groups for intervention. ### Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. ### Funding Statement This article is based on data from four Pelotas Birth Cohort studies conducted by Postgraduate Program in Epidemiology at Universidade Federal de Pelotas with the collaboration of the Brazilian Public Health Association (ABRASCO). The cohorts were funded by Wellcome Trust, The International Development Research Center (IDRC), World Health Organization, Overseas Development Administration, European Union, National Support Program for Centers of Excellence (PRONEX), Childrens Pastorate, Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul (FAPERGS), the Brazilian National Research Council (CNPq), and the Brazilian Ministry of Health. ### Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below: The 1982, 1993, and 2004 Pelotas birth cohorts study protocols were approved by the Medical School Ethics Committee of the Federal University of Pelotas (respective registration numbers: 16/12; 1.250.366; 40601116) and the 2015 birth cohort, by the School of Physical Education Ethics Committee of the Federal University of Pelotas (registration 26746414.5.0000.5313). The Como vai? study protocol was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Sciences of the Federal University of Pelotas (registration 24538513.1.0000.5317). The participation of the individuals in each study was voluntary, and informed consent was obtained from all participants. I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable. Yes All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.