4.6 Article

Comparability of Measured Acceleration from Accelerometry-Based Activity Monitors

期刊

MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE
卷 47, 期 1, 页码 201-210

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000394

关键词

GENEACTIV; ACTIGRAPH; GT3X+; TIME DOMAIN; FREQUENCY DOMAIN

资金

  1. Innovative Award from the National Osteoporosis Society, United Kingdom

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Accelerometers that provide triaxial measured acceleration data are now available. However, equivalence of output between brands cannot be assumed and testing is necessary to determine whether features of the acceleration signal are interchangeable. Purpose This study aimed to establish the equivalence of output between two brands of monitor in a laboratory and in a free-living environment. Methods For part 1, 38 adults performed nine laboratory-based activities while wearing an ActiGraph GT3X+ and GENEActiv (Gravity Estimator of Normal Everyday Activity) at the hip. For part 2, 58 children age 10-12 yr wore a GT3X+ and GENEActiv at the hip for 7 d in a free-living setting. Results For part 1, the magnitude of time domain features from the GENEActiv was greater than that from the GT3X+. However, frequency domain features compared well, with perfect agreement of the dominant frequency for 97%-100% of participants for most activities. For part 2, mean daily acceleration measured by the two brands was correlated (r = 0.93, P < 0.001, respectively) but the magnitude was approximately 15% lower for the GT3X+ than that for the GENEActiv at the hip. Conclusions Frequency domain-based classification algorithms should be transferable between monitors, and it should be possible to apply time domain-based classification algorithms developed for one device to the other by applying an affine conversion on the measured acceleration values. The strong relation between accelerations measured by the two brands suggests that habitual activity level and activity patterns assessed by the GENE and GT3X+ may compare well if analyzed appropriately.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据