OBJECTIVE: To review the use of accelerometry as an objective measure of physical activity in adults and elderly people. METHODS: A systematic review of studies on the use of accelerometty as an objective measure to assess physical activity in adults were examined in PubMed Central, Web of Knowledge, EBSCO and Medline databases from March 29 to April 15, 2010. The following keywords were used: "accelerometry," "accelerometer," "physical activity," "PA," "patterns," "levels," "adults," "older adults," and "elderly," either alone or in combination using "AND" or "OR." The reference lists of the articles retrieved were examined to capture any other potentially relevant article. Of 899 studies initially identified, only 18 were fully reviewed, and their outcome measures abstracted and analyzed. RESULTS: Eleven studies were conducted in North America (United States), five in Europe, one in Africa (Cameroon) and one in Australia. Very few enrolled older people, and only one study reported the season or time of year when data was collected. The articles selected had different methods, analyses, and results, which prevented comparison between studies. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need to standardize study methods for data reporting to allow comparisons of results across studies and monitor changes in populations. These data can help design more adequate strategies for monitoring and promotion of physical activity.
OBJECTIVE: To review the use of accelerometry as an objective measure of physical activity in adults and elderly people. METHODS: A systematic review of studies on the use of accelerometty as an objective measure to assess physical activity in adults were examined in PubMed Central, Web of Knowledge, EBSCO and Medline databases from March 29 to April 15, 2010. The following keywords were used: "accelerometry," "accelerometer," "physical activity," "PA," "patterns," "levels," "adults," "older adults," and "elderly," either alone or in combination using "AND" or "OR." The reference lists of the articles retrieved were examined to capture any other potentially relevant article. Of 899 studies initially identified, only 18 were fully reviewed, and their outcome measures abstracted and analyzed. RESULTS: Eleven studies were conducted in North America (United States), five in Europe, one in Africa (Cameroon) and one in Australia. Very few enrolled older people, and only one study reported the season or time of year when data was collected. The articles selected had different methods, analyses, and results, which prevented comparison between studies. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need to standardize study methods for data reporting to allow comparisons of results across studies and monitor changes in populations. These data can help design more adequate strategies for monitoring and promotion of physical activity.
Authors: Sandra Ortlieb; Lukas Gorzelniak; Dennis Nowak; Ralf Strobl; Eva Grill; Barbara Thorand; Annette Peters; Klaus A Kuhn; Stefan Karrasch; Alexander Horsch; Holger Schulz Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-11-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Marijke Jansen; Carlijn B M Kamphuis; Frank H Pierik; Dick F Ettema; Martin J Dijst Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2018-02-09 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Luca Laudani; Giuseppe Vannozzi; Zimi Sawacha; Ugo della Croce; Andrea Cereatti; Andrea Macaluso Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-09-06 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Sandra Ortlieb; André Dias; Lukas Gorzelniak; Dennis Nowak; Stefan Karrasch; Annette Peters; Klaus A Kuhn; Alexander Horsch; Holger Schulz Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2014-02-28 Impact factor: 6.457