Clare M P Roscoe1,2, Rob S James3, Michael J Duncan3. 1. Centre for Applied Biological and Exercise Sciences, Coventry University, Priory Street, Coventry, CV1 5FB, UK. roscoec@uni.coventry.ac.uk. 2. Sport, Exercise and Outdoor Sciences, University of Derby, Derby, UK. roscoec@uni.coventry.ac.uk. 3. Centre for Applied Biological and Exercise Sciences, Coventry University, Priory Street, Coventry, CV1 5FB, UK.
Abstract
This study sought to validate cut-points for use of wrist-worn GENEActiv accelerometer data, to analyse preschool children's (4 to 5 year olds) physical activity (PA) levels via calibration with oxygen consumption values (VO2). This was a laboratory-based calibration study. Twenty-one preschool children, aged 4.7 ± 0.5 years old, completed six activities (ranging from lying supine to running) whilst wearing the GENEActiv accelerometers at two locations (left and right wrist), these being the participants' non-dominant and dominant wrist, and a Cortex face mask for gas analysis. VO2 data was used for the assessment of criterion validity. Location specific activity intensity cut-points were established via receiver operator characteristic curve (ROC) analysis. The GENEActiv accelerometers, irrespective of their location, accurately discriminated between all PA intensities (sedentary, light, and moderate and above), with the dominant wrist monitor providing a slightly more precise discrimination at light PA and the non-dominant at the sedentary behaviour and moderate and above intensity levels (area under the curve (AUC) for non-dominant = 0.749-0.993, compared to AUC dominant = 0.760-0.988). CONCLUSION: This study establishes wrist-worn physical activity cut-points for the GENEActiv accelerometer in preschoolers. What is Known: • GENEActiv accelerometers have been validated as a PA measurement tool in adolescents and adults. • No study to date has validated the GENEActiv accelerometers in preschoolers. What is New: • Cut-points were determined for the wrist-worn GENEActiv accelerometer in preschoolers. • These cut-points can be used in future research to help classify and increase preschoolers' compliance rates with PA.
This study sought to validate cut-points for use of wrist-worn GENEActiv accelerometer data, to analyse preschool children's (4 to 5 year olds) physical activity (PA) levels via calibration with oxygen consumption values (VO2). This was a laboratory-based calibration study. Twenty-one preschool children, aged 4.7 ± 0.5 years old, completed six activities (ranging from lying supine to running) whilst wearing the GENEActiv accelerometers at two locations (left and right wrist), these being the participants' non-dominant and dominant wrist, and a Cortex face mask for gas analysis. VO2 data was used for the assessment of criterion validity. Location specific activity intensity cut-points were established via receiver operator characteristic curve (ROC) analysis. The GENEActiv accelerometers, irrespective of their location, accurately discriminated between all PA intensities (sedentary, light, and moderate and above), with the dominant wrist monitor providing a slightly more precise discrimination at light PA and the non-dominant at the sedentary behaviour and moderate and above intensity levels (area under the curve (AUC) for non-dominant = 0.749-0.993, compared to AUC dominant = 0.760-0.988). CONCLUSION: This study establishes wrist-worn physical activity cut-points for the GENEActiv accelerometer in preschoolers. What is Known: • GENEActiv accelerometers have been validated as a PA measurement tool in adolescents and adults. • No study to date has validated the GENEActiv accelerometers in preschoolers. What is New: • Cut-points were determined for the wrist-worn GENEActiv accelerometer in preschoolers. • These cut-points can be used in future research to help classify and increase preschoolers' compliance rates with PA.
Authors: Dale W Esliger; Ann V Rowlands; Tina L Hurst; Michael Catt; Peter Murray; Roger G Eston Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Annelinde Lettink; Teatske M Altenburg; Jelle Arts; Vincent T van Hees; Mai J M Chinapaw Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2022-09-08 Impact factor: 8.915
Authors: Layton Reesor-Oyer; Hannah Parker; Sarah Burkart; Michal T Smith; Roddrick Dugger; Lauren von Klinggraeff; R Glenn Weaver; Michael W Beets; Bridget Armstrong Journal: JMIR Res Protoc Date: 2022-09-28
Authors: Michael J Duncan; Alexandra Dobell; Mark Noon; Cain C T Clark; Clare M P Roscoe; Mark A Faghy; David Stodden; Ryan Sacko; Emma L J Eyre Journal: Sensors (Basel) Date: 2020-05-13 Impact factor: 3.576
Authors: Brian A Lynch; Tara K Kaufman; Tamim I Rajjo; K Mohammed; Seema Kumar; M Hassan Murad; Natalie E Gentile; Gabriel A Koepp; Shelly K McCrady-Spitzer; James A Levine Journal: J Prim Care Community Health Date: 2019 Jan-Dec