Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/20631
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport Journal Articles
Peer Review Status: Refereed
Title: Is the pain of activity log-books worth the gain in precision when distinguishing wear and non-wear time for tri-axial accelerometers?
Authors: Peeters, Geeske M E E
van, Gellecum Yolanda
Ryde, Gemma
Farias, Nicolas Aguilar
Brown, Wendy J
Contact Email: gemma.ryde@stir.ac.uk
Keywords: Motor activity
Actigraphy
Methods
Reproducibility of results
Issue Date: Nov-2013
Publisher: Elsevier
Citation: Peeters GMEE, van Gellecum Y, Ryde G, Farias NA & Brown WJ (2013) Is the pain of activity log-books worth the gain in precision when distinguishing wear and non-wear time for tri-axial accelerometers?, Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 16 (6), pp. 515-519.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE To compare three methods for assessing wear time from accelerometer data: automated, log-books and a combination of the two. DESIGN Cross-sectional study. METHODS Forty-five office workers wore an Actigraph GT3X accelerometer and kept a detailed activity log-book for 7 days. The automated method used six algorithms to determine non-wear time (20, 60, or 90 min of consecutive zero counts with and without 2-min interruptions); the log-book method used participant recorded on/off times; the combined method used the 60-min automated filter (with ≤2 min interruptions) plus detailed log-book data. Outcomes were number of participants with valid data, number of valid days, estimates of wear time and time spent in sedentary, light, moderate and vigorous activity. Percentage misclassification, sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver-operating curve were compared for each method, with the combined method as the reference. RESULTS Using the combined method, 34 participants met criteria for valid wear time (≥10 h/day, ≥4 days). Mean wear times ranged from 891 to 925 min/day and mean sedentary time s from 438 to 490 min/day. Percentage misclassification was higher and area under the receiver-operating curve was lower for the log-book method than for the automated methods. Percentage misclassification was lowest and area under the receiver-operating curve highest for the 20-min filter without interruptions, but this method had fewer valid days and participants than the 60 and 90-min filters without interruptions. CONCLUSIONS Automated filters are as accurate as a combination of automated filters and log-books for filtering wear time from accelerometer data. Automated filters based on 90-min of consecutive zero counts without interruptions are recommended for future studies.
Type: Journal Article
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/20631
DOI Link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2012.12.002
Rights: The publisher does not allow this work to be made publicly available in this Repository. Please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author. You can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study.
Affiliation: University of Queensland
University of Queensland
HS Research - Stirling
University of Queensland
University of Queensland

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport 2013.pdf177.38 kBAdobe PDFUnder Embargo until 31/12/2999     Request a copy

Note: If any of the files in this item are currently embargoed, you can request a copy directly from the author by clicking the padlock icon above. However, this facility is dependant on the depositor still being contactable at their original email address.

This item is protected by original copyright



Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.