Concurrent validity of the mox activity monitor compared to the actiGraph GT3X

Telemedicine and e-Health

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 259-266

  Van Der Weegen, Sanne ^a   Essers, Hans ^b   Spreeuwenberg, Marieke ^a   Verwey, Renée ^a,c   Tange, Huibert ^a   De Witte, Luc ^a,c   Meijer, Kenneth ^b  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c ZUYD UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

accelerometry; diabetes mellitus; e health; motor activity; pulmonary disease

Indexed keywords

PULMONARY DISEASES; SPORTING GOODS;

ACCELEROMETRY; ACTIVE LIFESTYLES; CHRONIC OBSTRUCTIVE PULMONARY DISEASE; DIABETES MELLITUS; MISCLASSIFICATIONS; MOTOR ACTIVITY; PHYSICAL ACTIVITY; SMART-PHONE APPLICATIONS;

WEB SERVICES;

ACCELERATION; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; CASE CONTROL STUDY; CHRONIC OBSTRUCTIVE LUNG DISEASE; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; DEVICE SAFETY; DEVICES; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; EXERCISE TEST; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NON INSULIN DEPENDENT DIABETES MELLITUS; NORMAL HUMAN; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGIC MONITORING; STATISTICAL MODEL; TELEMEDICINE; VALIDATION STUDY; YOUNG ADULT;

ACCELERATION; ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; DIABETES MELLITUS, TYPE 2; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; EQUIPMENT SAFETY; EXERCISE TEST; FEMALE; HEALTHY VOLUNTEERS; HUMANS; LINEAR MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MONITORING, PHYSIOLOGIC; PULMONARY DISEASE, CHRONIC OBSTRUCTIVE; TELEMEDICINE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84926476075     PISSN: 15305627     EISSN: 15563669     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/tmj.2014.0097     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Murphy SL. Review of physical activity measurement using accelerometers in olDer adults: ConsiDerations for research Design and conduct. Prev Med 2009;48:108-114
2. Warburton DE, Nicol CW, Bredin SS. Health benefits of physical activity: The eviDence. CMAJ 2006;174:801-809
3. Physical inactivity: A global public health problem. Global strategy on diet, physical activity and health. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2013
4. Orrow G, Kinmonth A-L, SanDerson S, Sutton S. Effectiveness of physical activity promotion based in primary care: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 2012;344:e1389
5. Avery L, Flynn D, Van Wersch A, Sniehotta FF, Trenell MI. Changing physical activity behavior in type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of behavioral interventions. Diabetes Care 2012;35:2681-2689
6. Van Achterberg T, Huisman-De Waal GG, Ketelaar NA, Oostendorp RA, Jacobs JE, Wollersheim HC. How to promote healthy behaviours in patients? An overview of eviDence for behaviour change techniques. Health Promot Int 2011;26:148-162
7. Bravata DM, Smith-Spangler C, Sundaram V, et al. Using pedometers to increase physical activity and improve health: A systematic review. JAMA 2007;298:2296-2304
8. Plasqui G, Westerterp KR. Physical activity assessment with accelerometers: An evaluation against doubly labeled water. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2007;15:2371-2379
9. Van Der Weegen S, Verwey R, Spreeuwenberg M, Tange H, Van Der WeijDen T, De Witte L. The Development of a mobile monitoring and feedback tool to stimulate physical activity of people with a chronic disease in primary care: A usercentered Design. JMIR mHealth uHealth 2013;1:e8
10. Van Der Weegen S, Verwey R, Tange HJ, Spreeuwenberg MD, De Witte LP. Usability testing of a monitoring and feedback tool to stimulate physical activity. Patient Prefer Adherence 2014;8:311-322
11. Verwey R, Van Der Weegen S, Spreeuwenberg M, Tange H, Van Der WeijDen T and De Witte L. A pilot study of a tool to stimulate physical activity in patients with COPD or type 2 diabetes in primary care. J Telemed Telecare 2014;20:29-34
12. Verwey R, Van Der Weegen S, Tange H, Spreeuwenberg M, Van Der WeijDen T, De Witte L. Get moving: The practice nurse is watching you! A case study of the user-centred Design process and testing of a web-based coaching system to stimulate the physical activity of chronically ill patients in primary care. Inform Primary Care 2012;20:289-298
13. Hanggi JM, Phillips LR, Rowlands AV. Validation of the GT3X ActiGraph in children and comparison with the GT1M ActiGraph. J Sci Med Sport 2013;16:40-44
14. Sasaki JE, John D, Freedson PS. Validation and comparison of ActiGraph activity monitors. J Sci Med Sport 2011;14:411-416
15. Vanhelst J, Mikulovic J, Bui-Xuan G, et al. Comparison of two ActiGraph accelerometer generations in the assessment of physical activity in free living conditions. BMC Res Notes 2012;5:187
16. Van Remoortel H, Raste Y, Louvaris Z, et al. Validity of six activity monitors in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A comparison with indirect calorimetry. PLoS One 2012;7:e39198
17. Rabinovich RA, Louvaris Z, Raste Y, et al. Validity of physical activity monitors during daily life in patients with COPD. Eur Respir J 2013;42:1205-1215
18. Annegarn J, Spruit MA, Savelberg HH, et al. Differences in walking pattern during 6-min walk test between patients with COPD and healthy subjects. PLoS One 2012;7:e37329
19. Bouten CV, Koekkoek KT, Verduin M, KodDe R, Janssen JD. A triaxial accelerometer and portable data processing unit for the assessment of daily physical activity. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1997;44:136-147
20. Preece SJ, Goulermas JY, Kenney LP, Howard D, Meijer K, Crompton R. Activity iDentification using body-mounted sensors-A review of classification techniques. Physiol Meas 2009;30:R1
21. Van Hees VT, Van Lummel RC, Westerterp KR. Estimating activity-related energy expenditure unDer seDentary conditions using a tri-axial seismic accelerometer. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2009;17:1287-1292
22. Esliger DW, Rowlands AV, Hurst TL, Catt M, Murray P, Eston RG. Validation of the GENEA accelerometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2011;43:1085-1093
23. Dowd KP, Harrington DM, Donnelly AE. Criterion and concurrent validity of the activPAL professional physical activity monitor in adolescent females. PLoS One 2012;7:e47633
24. Kaminsky LA, Ozemek C. A comparison of the Actigraph GT1M and GT3X accelerometers unDer standardized and free-living conditions. Physiol Meas 2012;33:1869-1876
25. Vanhelst J, Hurdiel R, Mikulovic J, et al. Validation of the Vivago wrist-worn accelerometer in the assessment of physical activity. BMC Public Health 2012;12:690
26. Trost SG, Way R, Okely AD. Predictive validity of three ActiGraph energy expenditure equations for children. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2006;38:380-387
27. Santos-Lozano A, Santin-MeDeiros F, Cardon G, et al. Actigraph GT3X: Validation and Determination of physical activity intensity cut points. Int J Sports Med 2013;34:975-982
28. HenDelman D, Miller K, Baggett C, et al. Validity of accelerometry for the assessment of moDerate intensity physical activity in the field. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2000;32(9 Suppl):S442-S449
29. Baarends EM, Schols AM, Pannemans DL, et al. Total free living energy expenditure in patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1997;155:549-554
30. Choquette S, Hamel M, Boissy P. Accelerometer-based wireless body area network to estimate intensity of therapy in post-acute rehabilitation. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2008;5:20