PURPOSE: The primary aim of this pilot study was to assess how well the combination of global positioning system (GPS) and accelerometer data predicted different activity modes. METHODS: Ten adults (seven male, three female; 23-51 yr) simultaneously wore a GPS unit and accelerometer during bouts of walking, jogging/running, bicycling, inline skating, or driving an automobile. Discriminant function analysis was used to identify a parsimonious combination of variables derived from accelerometer counts and steps and GPS speed that best classified mode. A total of 29 bouts were used to develop this classification criterion. This criterion was validated using two datasets generated from the complete collection of minute-by-minute values from all bouts. RESULTS: Model development with "calibration" data showed that two accelerometer variables alone (median counts and steps) resulted in 26 of 29 bouts (90%) being correctly classified. Prediction of activity mode using counts and steps in a minute-by-minute "validation" dataset (N = 200) was 86.5%. Using three variables from the accelerometer and GPS (median counts, steps and speed) resulted in correct classification in 27 of 29 activity bouts in the "calibration" data (93%). In the "validation" dataset comprising 200 min, the combination of accelerometer counts and steps and GPS speed were able to correctly classify 91% of the observations. Walking and bicycling minutes were correctly classified most frequently (96%). In another "validation" dataset consisting of activity bouts, this combination of variables resulted in correct classification in 42 of 43 bouts (98%). CONCLUSION: This pilot study provides evidence that the addition of GPS to accelerometer monitoring improves physical activity mode classification to a small degree. Larger studies among free-living individuals and with an expanded range of activities are needed to replicate the current findings and further determine the merits of using GPS with accelerometers for mode identification.
PURPOSE: The primary aim of this pilot study was to assess how well the combination of global positioning system (GPS) and accelerometer data predicted different activity modes. METHODS: Ten adults (seven male, three female; 23-51 yr) simultaneously wore a GPS unit and accelerometer during bouts of walking, jogging/running, bicycling, inline skating, or driving an automobile. Discriminant function analysis was used to identify a parsimonious combination of variables derived from accelerometer counts and steps and GPS speed that best classified mode. A total of 29 bouts were used to develop this classification criterion. This criterion was validated using two datasets generated from the complete collection of minute-by-minute values from all bouts. RESULTS: Model development with "calibration" data showed that two accelerometer variables alone (median counts and steps) resulted in 26 of 29 bouts (90%) being correctly classified. Prediction of activity mode using counts and steps in a minute-by-minute "validation" dataset (N = 200) was 86.5%. Using three variables from the accelerometer and GPS (median counts, steps and speed) resulted in correct classification in 27 of 29 activity bouts in the "calibration" data (93%). In the "validation" dataset comprising 200 min, the combination of accelerometer counts and steps and GPS speed were able to correctly classify 91% of the observations. Walking and bicycling minutes were correctly classified most frequently (96%). In another "validation" dataset consisting of activity bouts, this combination of variables resulted in correct classification in 42 of 43 bouts (98%). CONCLUSION: This pilot study provides evidence that the addition of GPS to accelerometer monitoring improves physical activity mode classification to a small degree. Larger studies among free-living individuals and with an expanded range of activities are needed to replicate the current findings and further determine the merits of using GPS with accelerometers for mode identification.
Authors: Daniel A Rodriguez; Gi-Hyoug Cho; John P Elder; Terry L Conway; Kelly R Evenson; Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar; Elizabeth Shay; Deborah Cohen; Sara Veblen-Mortenson; Julie Pickrell; Leslie Lytle Journal: J Phys Act Health Date: 2011-05-11
Authors: Peter James; Jennifer Weissman; Jean Wolf; Karen Mumford; Cheryl K Contant; Wei-Ting Hwang; Lynne Taylor; Karen Glanz Journal: Am J Health Behav Date: 2016-01
Authors: Valerie A Paz-Soldan; Steven T Stoddard; Gonzalo Vazquez-Prokopec; Amy C Morrison; John P Elder; Uriel Kitron; Tadeusz J Kochel; Thomas W Scott Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: Bumjoon Kang; Anne V Moudon; Philip M Hurvitz; Lucas Reichley; Brian E Saelens Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Peter James; Marta Jankowska; Christine Marx; Jaime E Hart; David Berrigan; Jacqueline Kerr; Philip M Hurvitz; J Aaron Hipp; Francine Laden Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2016-08-12 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: David Ogilvie; Simon Griffin; Andy Jones; Roger Mackett; Cornelia Guell; Jenna Panter; Natalia Jones; Simon Cohn; Lin Yang; Cheryl Chapman Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2010-11-16 Impact factor: 3.295