BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare steps/day detected by the YAMAX SW-200 pedometer versus the Actigraph GT3X accelerometer in free-living adults. METHODS: Daily YAMAX and GT3X steps were collected from a sample of 23 overweight and obese participants (78% female; age = 52.6 ± 8.4 yr.; BMI = 31.0 ± 3.7 m·kg-2). Because a pedometer is more likely to be used in a community-based intervention program, it was used as the standard for comparison. Percent difference (PD) and absolute percent difference (APD) were calculated to examine between-instrument agreement. In addition, days were categorized based on PD: a) under-counting (> -10 PD), b) acceptable counting (-10 to 10 PD), and c) over-counting (> 10 PD). RESULTS: The YAMAX and GT3X detected 8,025 ± 3,967 and 7131 ± 3066 steps/day, respectively, and the outputs were highly correlated (r = .87). Average PD was -3.1% ± 30.7% and average APD was 23.9% ± 19.4%. Relative to the YAMAX, 53% of the days detected by the GT3X were classified as under-counting, 25% acceptable counting, and 23% over-counting. CONCLUSION: Although the output of these 2 instruments is highly correlated, caution is advised when directly comparing or using their output interchangeably.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare steps/day detected by the YAMAX SW-200 pedometer versus the Actigraph GT3X accelerometer in free-living adults. METHODS: Daily YAMAX and GT3X steps were collected from a sample of 23 overweight and obeseparticipants (78% female; age = 52.6 ± 8.4 yr.; BMI = 31.0 ± 3.7 m·kg-2). Because a pedometer is more likely to be used in a community-based intervention program, it was used as the standard for comparison. Percent difference (PD) and absolute percent difference (APD) were calculated to examine between-instrument agreement. In addition, days were categorized based on PD: a) under-counting (> -10 PD), b) acceptable counting (-10 to 10 PD), and c) over-counting (> 10 PD). RESULTS: The YAMAX and GT3X detected 8,025 ± 3,967 and 7131 ± 3066 steps/day, respectively, and the outputs were highly correlated (r = .87). Average PD was -3.1% ± 30.7% and average APD was 23.9% ± 19.4%. Relative to the YAMAX, 53% of the days detected by the GT3X were classified as under-counting, 25% acceptable counting, and 23% over-counting. CONCLUSION: Although the output of these 2 instruments is highly correlated, caution is advised when directly comparing or using their output interchangeably.
Authors: Gerson Ferrari; Adilson Marques; Tiago V Barreira; Irina Kovalskys; Georgina Gómez; Attilio Rigotti; Lilia Yadira Cortés; Martha Cecilia Yépez García; Rossina G Pareja; Marianella Herrera-Cuenca; Viviana Guajardo; Ana Carolina B Leme; Juan Guzmán Habinger; Pedro Valdivia-Moral; Mónica Suárez-Reyes; Andreas Ihle; Elvio R Gouveia; Mauro Fisberg Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-04-27 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Anne H Y Chu; Sheryl H X Ng; Mahsa Paknezhad; Alvaro Gauterin; David Koh; Michael S Brown; Falk Müller-Riemenschneider Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-02-24 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Luis Carlos Oliveira; Gerson Luis de Moraes Ferrari; Timóteo Leandro Araújo; Victor Matsudo Journal: Rev Saude Publica Date: 2017-04-27 Impact factor: 2.106
Authors: B O'Neill; S M McDonough; J J Wilson; I Bradbury; K Hayes; A Kirk; L Kent; D Cosgrove; J M Bradley; M A Tully Journal: Respir Res Date: 2017-01-14
Authors: Kieran P Dowd; Robert Szeklicki; Marco Alessandro Minetto; Marie H Murphy; Angela Polito; Ezio Ghigo; Hidde van der Ploeg; Ulf Ekelund; Janusz Maciaszek; Rafal Stemplewski; Maciej Tomczak; Alan E Donnelly Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2018-02-08 Impact factor: 6.457