Is the pain of activity log-books worth the gain in precision when distinguishing wear and non-wear time for tri-axial accelerometers?

Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport

Volumn 16, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 515-519

  Peeters, Geeske ^a   van Gellecum, Yolanda ^a   Ryde, Gemma ^a   Farías, Nicolas Aguilar ^a   Brown, Wendy J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

Actigraphy; Methods; Motor activity; Reproducibility of results

Indexed keywords

ACCELEROMETER; ADULT; ALGORITHM; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; AUTOMATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; MEASUREMENT ACCURACY; NORMAL HUMAN; OFFICE WORKER; PHYSICAL ACTIVITY; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SITTING; TIME;

ACTIGRAPHY; METHODS; MOTOR ACTIVITY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

ACCELEROMETRY; ADULT; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PILOT PROJECTS; SELF REPORT;

EID: 84885847280     PISSN: 14402440     EISSN: 18781861     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jsams.2012.12.002     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Ward D.S., Evenson K.R., Vaughn A., et al. Accelerometer use in physical activity: best practices and research recommendations. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2005, 37(11 Suppl):S582-S588.
2. Matthews C.E., Chen K.Y., Freedson P.S., et al. Amount of time spent in sedentary behaviors in the United States, 2003-2004. Am J Epidemiol 2008, 167(7):875-881.
3. Masse L.C., Fuemmeler B.F., Anderson C.B., et al. Accelerometer data reduction: a comparison of four reduction algorithms on select outcome variables. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2005, 37(11 Suppl):S544-S554.
4. Choi L., Liu Z., Matthews C.E., et al. Validation of accelerometer wear and nonwear time classification algorithm. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2011, 43(2):357-364.
5. Winkler E.A., Gardiner P.A., Clark B.K., et al. Identifying sedentary time using automated estimates of accelerometer wear time. Br J Sports Med 2012, 46(6):8.
6. Trost S.G., McIver K.L., Pate R.R. Conducting accelerometer-based activity assessments in field-based research. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2005, 37(11 Suppl):S531-S543.
7. Choi L., Ward S.C., Schnelle J.F., Buchowski M.S. Assessment of wear/nonwear time classification algorithms for triaxial accelerometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2012, 44(October (10)):2009-2016.
8. Heil D.P., Brage S., Rothney M.P. Modeling physical activity outcomes from wearable monitors. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2012, 44(1 Suppl 1):S50-S60.
9. Obesity: preventing and managing the global epidemic. Report of a WHO consultation. World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser 2000, 894(i-xii):1-253.
10. Evenson K.R., Terry J.W. Assessment of differing definitions of accelerometer nonwear time. Res Q Exerc Sport 2009, 80(2):355-362.
11. Perry M.A., Hendrick P.A., Hale L., et al. Utility of the RT3 triaxial accelerometer in free living: an investigation of adherence and data loss. Appl Ergon 2010, 41(3):469-476.
12. Matthews C.E., Hagstromer M., Pober D.M., et al. Best practices for using physical activity monitors in population-based research. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2012, 44(1 Suppl 1):S68-S76.
13. Kozey-Keadle S., Libertine A., Lyden K., et al. Validation of wearable monitors for assessing sedentary behavior. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2011, 43(8):1561-1567.
14. Sasaki J.E., John D., Freedson P.S. Validation and comparison of ActiGraph activity monitors. J Sci Med Sport 2011, 14(5):411-416.
15. Brown W.J., Burton N.W., Marshall A.L., et al. Reliability and validity of a modified self-administered version of the active Australia physical activity survey in a sample of mid-age women. Aust NZ J Public Health 2008, 32(6):535-541.
16. Catellier D.J., Hannan P.J., Murray D.M., et al. Imputation of missing data when measuring physical activity by accelerometry. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2005, 37(11 Suppl):S555-S562.
17. Staudenmayer J., Zhu W., Catellier D.J. Statistical considerations in the analysis of accelerometry-based activity monitor data. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2012, 44(1 Suppl 1):S61-S67.