Literature DB >> 22306372

Everything you wanted to know about selecting the "right" Actigraph accelerometer cut-points for youth, but…: a systematic review.

Youngwon Kim1, Michael W Beets, Gregory J Welk.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to provide an overview of the evidence on the calibration of ActiGraph accelerometers to quantify moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) for youth through the use of cut-points and describe the independent validation studies comparing the accuracy of the developed cut-points to a criterion measure.
DESIGN: A systematic review.
METHODS: Studies were identified that: (a) developed ActiGraph accelerometer cut-points for children and youth (calibration study); or (b) performed an independent validation of already established cut-points (validation study). Both calibration studies and independent validation studies were retrieved through a systematic search of online databases. According to proposed guidelines for designing accelerometer calibration studies, each calibration study was evaluated on the following criteria: quality of a criterion measure employed; epoch length; inclusion of a variety of activities; and sample size.
RESULTS: A total of 11 calibration studies were identified. Two studies met all four criteria for a calibration study. A total of 4 independent validation studies were identified. Three of them reported that no cut-points accurately classified moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) across all ranges of physical activity intensity levels in comparison to a criterion measure. The fourth study reported two sets of cut-points that under laboratory conditions, accurately classified moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) compared to indirect calorimetry.
CONCLUSIONS: Limited evidence suggests that two sets of cut-points correctly classify ActiGraph counts into moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). However, limitations with calibration and validation studies indicate greater efforts aimed at designing high quality studies are needed to confirm these findings.
Copyright © 2011 Sports Medicine Australia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22306372     DOI: 10.1016/j.jsams.2011.12.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Sci Med Sport        ISSN: 1878-1861            Impact factor:   4.319


  47 in total

Review 1.  Practical physical activity measurement in youth: a review of contemporary approaches.

Authors:  Jerome N Rachele; Steven M McPhail; Tracy L Washington; Thomas F Cuddihy
Journal:  World J Pediatr       Date:  2012-08-12       Impact factor: 2.764

Review 2.  Objectively measured sedentary behaviour and cardio-metabolic risk in youth: a review of evidence.

Authors:  Andreas Fröberg; Anders Raustorp
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  2014-05-21       Impact factor: 3.183

3.  Physical activity across the curriculum (PAAC3): Testing the application of technology delivered classroom physical activity breaks.

Authors:  Amanda N Szabo-Reed; Richard A Washburn; J Leon Greene; Lauren T Ptomey; Anna Gorczyca; Robert H Lee; Todd D Little; Jaehoon Lee; Jeff Honas; Joseph E Donnelly
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2020-01-29       Impact factor: 2.226

4.  A comparison of accelerometer cut-points for measuring physical activity and sedentary time in adolescents with Down syndrome.

Authors:  Bethany Forseth; Jordan A Carlson; Erik A Willis; Brian C Helsel; Lauren T Ptomey
Journal:  Res Dev Disabil       Date:  2021-11-24

5.  New Insights into Activity Patterns in Children, Found Using Functional Data Analyses.

Authors:  Jeff Goldsmith; Xinyue Liu; Judith S Jacobson; Andrew Rundle
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 5.411

6.  Associations of Vigorous-Intensity Physical Activity with Biomarkers in Youth.

Authors:  Justin B Moore; Michael W Beets; Keith Brazendale; Steven N Blair; Russell R Pate; Lars B Andersen; Sigmund A Anderssen; Anders Grøntved; Pedro C Hallal; Katarzyna Kordas; Susi Kriemler; John J Reilly; Luis B Sardinha
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 5.411

7.  Equating accelerometer estimates among youth: The Rosetta Stone 2.

Authors:  Keith Brazendale; Michael W Beets; Daniel B Bornstein; Justin B Moore; Russell R Pate; Robert G Weaver; Ryan S Falck; Jessica L Chandler; Lars B Andersen; Sigmund A Anderssen; Greet Cardon; Ashley Cooper; Rachel Davey; Karsten Froberg; Pedro C Hallal; Kathleen F Janz; Katarzyna Kordas; Susi Kriemler; Jardena J Puder; John J Reilly; Jo Salmon; Luis B Sardinha; Anna Timperio; Esther M F van Sluijs
Journal:  J Sci Med Sport       Date:  2015-02-23       Impact factor: 4.319

8.  Association of objectively measured physical activity and bone health in children and adolescents: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.

Authors:  V L Bland; M Heatherington-Rauth; C Howe; S B Going; J W Bea
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2020-06-16       Impact factor: 4.507

9.  Evaluation framework for selecting wearable activity monitors for research.

Authors:  Kay Connelly; Haley Molchan; Rashmi Bidanta; Sudhanshu Siddh; Byron Lowens; Kelly Caine; George Demiris; Katie Siek; Blaine Reeder
Journal:  Mhealth       Date:  2021-01-20

10.  Comparisons of prediction equations for estimating energy expenditure in youth.

Authors:  Youngwon Kim; Scott E Crouter; Jung-Min Lee; Phillip M Dixon; Glenn A Gaesser; Gregory J Welk
Journal:  J Sci Med Sport       Date:  2014-10-18       Impact factor: 4.319

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.