Literature DB >> 1435166

Variability of some objective measures of physical activity.

R J Gretebeck1, H J Montoye.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine how many days subjects should be monitored to provide an estimate of habitual physical activity in employed men engaged in a wide range of occupations. Caloric intake, movement recorders (accelerometers and pedometers), and heart rate were the measurements studied in 30 subjects who were monitored during their waking hours for 7 continuous days. A repeated measures ANOVA showed no significant difference between days (P > 0.05) for any of the measures when only weekdays were compared. However, when weekend days were included a majority of the measures showed a significant F-ratio (P < 0.05). An estimate was made of the number of days required to measure a 7-d period with less than 5% error. The average for all the different measures was 4.9 d. It appears that at least 5 or 6 d are needed to minimize the intra-individual variance a reasonable degree. Weekdays as well as weekend days need to be included.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1435166

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc        ISSN: 0195-9131            Impact factor:   5.411


  34 in total

Review 1.  Limits to the measurement of habitual physical activity by questionnaires.

Authors:  R J Shephard
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 13.800

2.  Variability in physical activity patterns as measured by the SenseWear Armband: how many days are needed?

Authors:  Tineke Scheers; Renaat Philippaerts; Johan Lefevre
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2011-08-28       Impact factor: 3.078

Review 3.  Measurement of physical activity in children with particular reference to the use of heart rate and pedometry.

Authors:  A V Rowlands; R G Eston; D K Ingledew
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 11.136

4.  How Many Days Are Necessary to Represent an Infant's Typical Daily Leg Movement Behavior Using Wearable Sensors?

Authors:  Weiyang Deng; Ivan A Trujillo-Priego; Beth A Smith
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2019-06-01

Review 5.  Physical Activity Monitoring in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Authors:  Shu-Yi Liao; Roberto Benzo; Andrew L Ries; Xavier Soler
Journal:  Chronic Obstr Pulm Dis       Date:  2014-09-25

6.  Deriving a GPS Monitoring Time Recommendation for Physical Activity Studies of Adults.

Authors:  Katelyn M Holliday; Annie Green Howard; Michael Emch; Daniel A Rodríguez; Wayne D Rosamond; Kelly R Evenson
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 5.411

7.  Predictors of discordance in self-report versus device-measured physical activity measurement.

Authors:  Jessica Gorzelitz; Paul E Peppard; Kristen Malecki; Keith Gennuso; F Javier Nieto; Lisa Cadmus-Bertram
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2018-03-30       Impact factor: 3.797

8.  Determining activity monitor wear time: an influential decision rule.

Authors:  Wendy C King; Jia Li; Kira Leishear; James E Mitchell; Steven H Belle
Journal:  J Phys Act Health       Date:  2011-05

9.  A comparison of two motion sensors for the assessment of free-living physical activity of adolescents.

Authors:  Roman Cuberek; Walid El Ansari; Karel Frömel; Krzysztof Skalik; Erik Sigmund
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2010-04-06       Impact factor: 3.390

10.  Reliability of RT3 accelerometers among overweight and obese adults.

Authors:  Gerald J Jerome; Deborah Rohm Young; Dan Laferriere; Chuhe Chen; William M Vollmer
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 5.411

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.