Literature DB >> 25852024

Validity of GT3X and Actiheart to estimate sedentary time and breaks using ActivPAL as the reference in free-living conditions.

Pedro B Júdice1, Diana A Santos2, Marc T Hamilton3, Luís B Sardinha4, Analiza M Silva5.   

Abstract

Sedentary time, specifically sitting/reclining, is a risk factor for many non-communicable diseases and premature mortality. Inclinometers have been used as a valid measurement of sedentary time and its patterns; however, there is a lack of information regarding the validity of alternative accelerometry and heart rate methods. The validity of GT3X and Actiheart in estimating changes in daily sedentary time and breaks, during free-living settings, using ActivPAL as the reference was examined. A crossover randomized control trial of an intervention that aimed to reduce ∼3 h/day of sitting time included 10 overweight/obese adults (37-65 years). Participants had a total of 74 valid days for the three devices (29 controls; 45 interventions). For ActivPAL, sedentary time was measured directly based upon posture (sitting/reclining); Actiheart, the presumed MET cutpoint for sedentary time (<1.5 METs) based on accelerometry+heart rate; GT3X, the traditional <100countsmin(-1). A break in sedentary time was defined as when the participants were above the aforementioned cutoffs. GT3X overestimated and Actiheart underestimated sedentary time (bias=135min; bias=-156min, respectively) and both methods overestimated breaks in sedentary time (bias=78; bias=235 breaks, respectively). The GT3X method was in better agreement with the ActivPAL sedentary time (r2=0.70; concordance correlation coefficient (CCC)=0.56) than the Actiheart (r2=0.24; CCC=0.31). The present results highlight the magnitude of potential errors in estimating sedentary time and breaks from common alternative methods other than ActivPAL. Because misclassification errors from the commonly used surrogates are potentially large, this raises concern that alternative methods used in many epidemiological observations may have underestimated the true effects caused by too much sitting (ClinicalTrials.govID:NCT02007681).
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Inclinometer; Intervention; Motion sensor; Objective methods; Sedentary patterns

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25852024     DOI: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2015.03.326

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gait Posture        ISSN: 0966-6362            Impact factor:   2.840


  21 in total

1.  Dietary Intervention for Glucose Tolerance In Teens (DIG IT): Protocol of a randomized controlled trial using health coaching to prevent youth-onset type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  Kelly A Wagner; Ethan Braun; Seth M Armah; Diarmuid Horan; Lisa G Smith; Julie Pike; Wanzhu Tu; Marc T Hamilton; Edward J Delp; Wayne W Campbell; Carol J Boushey; Tamara S Hannon; Nana Gletsu-Miller
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2016-12-21       Impact factor: 2.226

2.  Using Activity Monitors to Measure Sit-to-Stand Transitions in Overweight/Obese Youth.

Authors:  Tarrah Mitchell; Kelsey Borner; Jonathan Finch; Jacqueline Kerr; Jordan A Carlson
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 5.411

3.  A Novel Smartphone Accelerometer Application for Low-Intensity Activity and Energy Expenditure Estimations in Overweight and Obese Adults.

Authors:  Sylvie Rousset; Romain Guidoux; Ludivine Paris; Nicolas Farigon; Magalie Miolanne; Clément Lahaye; Martine Duclos; Yves Boirie; Damien Saboul
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2017-07-03       Impact factor: 4.460

4.  Association of sitting time and breaks in sitting with muscle mass, strength, function, and inflammation in community-dwelling older adults.

Authors:  N Reid; G N Healy; J Gianoudis; M Formica; P A Gardiner; E E Eakin; C A Nowson; R M Daly
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2018-02-26       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  Longitudinal associations of physical activity and sedentary time with cardiometabolic risk factors in children.

Authors:  Juuso Väistö; Eero A Haapala; Anna Viitasalo; Theresia M Schnurr; Tuomas O Kilpeläinen; Panu Karjalainen; Kate Westgate; Hanna-Maaria Lakka; David E Laaksonen; Ulf Ekelund; Søren Brage; Timo A Lakka
Journal:  Scand J Med Sci Sports       Date:  2018-10-23       Impact factor: 4.221

6.  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

7.  Objectively measured sedentary behavior and physical activity of Finnish 7- to 14-year-old children- associations with perceived health status: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Pauliina Husu; Henri Vähä-Ypyä; Tommi Vasankari
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2016-04-16       Impact factor: 3.295

8.  Comparability of activity monitors used in Asian and Western-country studies for assessing free-living sedentary behaviour.

Authors:  Satoshi Kurita; Shohei Yano; Kaori Ishii; Ai Shibata; Hiroyuki Sasai; Yoshio Nakata; Noritoshi Fukushima; Shigeru Inoue; Shigeho Tanaka; Takemi Sugiyama; Neville Owen; Koichiro Oka
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-10-18       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Objective and subjective measurement of sedentary behavior in human adults: A toolkit.

Authors:  Justin Aunger; Janelle Wagnild
Journal:  Am J Hum Biol       Date:  2020-12-05       Impact factor: 2.947

10.  Objective assessment of physical activity and sedentary behaviour in knee osteoarthritis patients - beyond daily steps and total sedentary time.

Authors:  Maik Sliepen; Elsa Mauricio; Matthijs Lipperts; Bernd Grimm; Dieter Rosenbaum
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2018-02-23       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.