Adrián Hernández-Vicente1, Alejandro Santos-Lozano2, Katrien De Cocker3, Nuria Garatachea4. 1. Faculty of Health and Sport Science, University of Zaragoza, Huesca, Spain ; 2. GIDFYS, European University Miguel de Cervantes, Valladolid, Spain; ; Research Institute of Hospital 12 de Octubre ("i+12"), Madrid, Spain; 3. Department of Movement and Sports Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium ; 4. Faculty of Health and Sport Science, University of Zaragoza, Huesca, Spain; ; GENUD, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The correct quantification of physical activity (PA) and energy expenditure (EE) in daily life is an important target for researchers and professionals. The objective of this paper is to study the validity of the Polar V800 for the quantification of PA and the estimation of EE against the ActiGraph (ActiTrainer) in healthy young adults. METHODS: Eighteen Caucasian active people (50% women) aged between 19-23 years wore an ActiTrainer on the right hip and a Polar V800 on the preferred wrist during 7 days. Paired samples t-tests were used to analyze differences in outcomes between devices, and Pearson's correlation coefficients to examine the correlation between outcomes. The agreement was studied using the Bland-Altman method. Also, the association between the difference and the magnitude of the measurement (heteroscedasticity) was examined. Sensitivity, specificity and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC value) were calculated to evaluate the ability of the devices to accurately define a person who fulfills the recommendation of 10,000 daily steps. RESULTS: The devices significantly differed from each other on all outcomes (P<0.05), except for Polar V800's alerts vs. ActiTrainer's 1 hour sedentary bouts (P=0.595) and Polar V800's walking time vs. ActiTrainer's lifestyle time (P=0.484). Heteroscedasticity analyses were significant for all outcomes, except for Kcal and sitting time. The ROC-AUC value was fair (0.781±0.048) and the sensitivity and specificity was 98% and 58%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The Polar V800 accelerometer has a comparable validity to the accelerometer in free-living conditions, regarding "1 hour sedentary bouts" and "V800's walking time vs. ActiTrainer's lifestyle time" in young adults.
BACKGROUND: The correct quantification of physical activity (PA) and energy expenditure (EE) in daily life is an important target for researchers and professionals. The objective of this paper is to study the validity of the Polar V800 for the quantification of PA and the estimation of EE against the ActiGraph (ActiTrainer) in healthy young adults. METHODS: Eighteen Caucasian active people (50% women) aged between 19-23 years wore an ActiTrainer on the right hip and a Polar V800 on the preferred wrist during 7 days. Paired samples t-tests were used to analyze differences in outcomes between devices, and Pearson's correlation coefficients to examine the correlation between outcomes. The agreement was studied using the Bland-Altman method. Also, the association between the difference and the magnitude of the measurement (heteroscedasticity) was examined. Sensitivity, specificity and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC value) were calculated to evaluate the ability of the devices to accurately define a person who fulfills the recommendation of 10,000 daily steps. RESULTS: The devices significantly differed from each other on all outcomes (P<0.05), except for Polar V800's alerts vs. ActiTrainer's 1 hour sedentary bouts (P=0.595) and Polar V800's walking time vs. ActiTrainer's lifestyle time (P=0.484). Heteroscedasticity analyses were significant for all outcomes, except for Kcal and sitting time. The ROC-AUC value was fair (0.781±0.048) and the sensitivity and specificity was 98% and 58%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The Polar V800 accelerometer has a comparable validity to the accelerometer in free-living conditions, regarding "1 hour sedentary bouts" and "V800's walking time vs. ActiTrainer's lifestyle time" in young adults.
Entities:
Keywords:
Accelerometry; energy expenditure (EE); physical activity (PA); validity; young adults
Authors: Charles E Matthews; Kong Y Chen; Patty S Freedson; Maciej S Buchowski; Bettina M Beech; Russell R Pate; Richard P Troiano Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2008-02-25 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Wojtek J Chodzko-Zajko; David N Proctor; Maria A Fiatarone Singh; Christopher T Minson; Claudio R Nigg; George J Salem; James S Skinner Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2009-07 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Jacqueline Kerr; James F Sallis; Neville Owen; Ilse De Bourdeaudhuij; Ester Cerin; Takemi Sugiyama; Rodrigo Reis; Olga Sarmiento; Karel Frömel; Josef Mitás; Jens Troelsen; Lars Breum Christiansen; Duncan Macfarlane; Deborah Salvo; Grant Schofield; Hannah Badland; Francisco Guillen-Grima; Ines Aguinaga-Ontoso; Rachel Davey; Adrian Bauman; Brian Saelens; Chris Riddoch; Barbara Ainsworth; Michael Pratt; Tom Schmidt; Lawrence Frank; Marc Adams; Terry Conway; Kelli Cain; Delfien Van Dyck; Nicole Bracy Journal: J Phys Act Health Date: 2012-09-11
Authors: Lisa A Cadmus-Bertram; Bess H Marcus; Ruth E Patterson; Barbara A Parker; Brittany L Morey Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2015-06-10 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Carol Ewing Garber; Bryan Blissmer; Michael R Deschenes; Barry A Franklin; Michael J Lamonte; I-Min Lee; David C Nieman; David P Swain Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2011-07 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: William L Haskell; I-Min Lee; Russell R Pate; Kenneth E Powell; Steven N Blair; Barry A Franklin; Caroline A Macera; Gregory W Heath; Paul D Thompson; Adrian Bauman Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: I-Min Lee; Eric J Shiroma; Felipe Lobelo; Pekka Puska; Steven N Blair; Peter T Katzmarzyk Journal: Lancet Date: 2012-07-21 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Manuel V Garnacho-Castaño; Marcos Faundez-Zanuy; Noemí Serra-Payá; José L Maté-Muñoz; Josep López-Xarbau; Moisés Vila-Blanch Journal: J Sports Sci Med Date: 2021-03-01 Impact factor: 2.988
Authors: Andrea Wigna; Jacqueline B Urban; Wésley Torres; Lucas G Moraes-Chagas; Jefferson S Dias; David S Nunes; Veronica A de-Menezes; Rômulo A Fernandes Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2022-09-20
Authors: André Henriksen; Martin Haugen Mikalsen; Ashenafi Zebene Woldaregay; Miroslav Muzny; Gunnar Hartvigsen; Laila Arnesdatter Hopstock; Sameline Grimsgaard Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2018-03-22 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Daniel Fuller; Emily Colwell; Jonathan Low; Kassia Orychock; Melissa Ann Tobin; Bo Simango; Richard Buote; Desiree Van Heerden; Hui Luan; Kimberley Cullen; Logan Slade; Nathan G A Taylor Journal: JMIR Mhealth Uhealth Date: 2020-09-08 Impact factor: 4.773
Authors: Federico Germini; Noella Noronha; Victoria Borg Debono; Binu Abraham Philip; Drashti Pete; Tamara Navarro; Arun Keepanasseril; Sameer Parpia; Kerstin de Wit; Alfonso Iorio Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2022-01-21 Impact factor: 5.428