Comparability of Measured Acceleration from Accelerometry-Based Activity Monitors

BACKGROUNDAccelerometers that provide triaxial measured acceleration data are now available. However, equivalence of output between brands cannot be assumed and testing is necessary to determine whether features of the acceleration signal are interchangeable. PURPOSEThis study aimed to establish the...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Medicine and science in sports and exercise 2015-01, Vol.47 (1), p.201-210
Hauptverfasser: Rowlands, Alex V, Fraysse, FranÇois, Catt, Mike, Stiles, Victoria H, Stanley, Rebecca M, Eston, Roger G, Olds, Tim S
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 210
container_issue 1
container_start_page 201
container_title Medicine and science in sports and exercise
container_volume 47
creator Rowlands, Alex V
Fraysse, FranÇois
Catt, Mike
Stiles, Victoria H
Stanley, Rebecca M
Eston, Roger G
Olds, Tim S
description BACKGROUNDAccelerometers that provide triaxial measured acceleration data are now available. However, equivalence of output between brands cannot be assumed and testing is necessary to determine whether features of the acceleration signal are interchangeable. PURPOSEThis study aimed to establish the equivalence of output between two brands of monitor in a laboratory and in a free-living environment. METHODSFor part 1, 38 adults performed nine laboratory-based activities while wearing an ActiGraph GT3X+ and GENEActiv (Gravity Estimator of Normal Everyday Activity) at the hip. For part 2, 58 children age 10–12 yr wore a GT3X+ and GENEActiv at the hip for 7 d in a free-living setting. RESULTSFor part 1, the magnitude of time domain features from the GENEActiv was greater than that from the GT3X+. However, frequency domain features compared well, with perfect agreement of the dominant frequency for 97%–100% of participants for most activities. For part 2, mean daily acceleration measured by the two brands was correlated (r = 0.93, P < 0.001, respectively) but the magnitude was approximately 15% lower for the GT3X+ than that for the GENEActiv at the hip. CONCLUSIONSFrequency domain-based classification algorithms should be transferable between monitors, and it should be possible to apply time domain-based classification algorithms developed for one device to the other by applying an affine conversion on the measured acceleration values. The strong relation between accelerations measured by the two brands suggests that habitual activity level and activity patterns assessed by the GENE and GT3X+ may compare well if analyzed appropriately.
doi_str_mv 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000394
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1637552649</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1637552649</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5384-553831a26afed5a473c8c757d6e506e5981e8a104c299a66877817300ce4f7b63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1LAzEQhoMotlb_gcgevWxNNskmOWrxC1pEqueQZmfp6m5Tk11L_72pbUU8ODAzMDzvzPAidE7wkGRMXU2m0yH-HVSxA9QnnOIUU8IPUR8TxVNFKOmhkxDeIiMoJceolzEpMBeij55Hrlkab2ZVXbXrxJXJBEzoPBTJtbVQgzdt5RZJ6V2zn7gGWr9Ob0z4ptrqcyOduEXVOh9O0VFp6gBnuz5Ar3e3L6OHdPx0_zi6HqeWU8lSHislJstNCQU3TFArreCiyIHjmEoSkIZgZjOlTJ5LISQRFGMLrBSznA7Q5Xbv0ruPDkKrmyrE_2qzANcFTXIqOM9ypiLKtqj1LgQPpV76qjF-rQnWGzN1NFP_NTPKLnYXulkDxY9o714E5BZYuboFH97rbgVez8HU7fz_3V9Cv4AC</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1637552649</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparability of Measured Acceleration from Accelerometry-Based Activity Monitors</title><source>Journals@Ovid Ovid Autoload</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid LWW Legacy Archive</source><creator>Rowlands, Alex V ; Fraysse, FranÇois ; Catt, Mike ; Stiles, Victoria H ; Stanley, Rebecca M ; Eston, Roger G ; Olds, Tim S</creator><creatorcontrib>Rowlands, Alex V ; Fraysse, FranÇois ; Catt, Mike ; Stiles, Victoria H ; Stanley, Rebecca M ; Eston, Roger G ; Olds, Tim S</creatorcontrib><description>BACKGROUNDAccelerometers that provide triaxial measured acceleration data are now available. However, equivalence of output between brands cannot be assumed and testing is necessary to determine whether features of the acceleration signal are interchangeable. PURPOSEThis study aimed to establish the equivalence of output between two brands of monitor in a laboratory and in a free-living environment. METHODSFor part 1, 38 adults performed nine laboratory-based activities while wearing an ActiGraph GT3X+ and GENEActiv (Gravity Estimator of Normal Everyday Activity) at the hip. For part 2, 58 children age 10–12 yr wore a GT3X+ and GENEActiv at the hip for 7 d in a free-living setting. RESULTSFor part 1, the magnitude of time domain features from the GENEActiv was greater than that from the GT3X+. However, frequency domain features compared well, with perfect agreement of the dominant frequency for 97%–100% of participants for most activities. For part 2, mean daily acceleration measured by the two brands was correlated (r = 0.93, P &lt; 0.001, respectively) but the magnitude was approximately 15% lower for the GT3X+ than that for the GENEActiv at the hip. CONCLUSIONSFrequency domain-based classification algorithms should be transferable between monitors, and it should be possible to apply time domain-based classification algorithms developed for one device to the other by applying an affine conversion on the measured acceleration values. The strong relation between accelerations measured by the two brands suggests that habitual activity level and activity patterns assessed by the GENE and GT3X+ may compare well if analyzed appropriately.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0195-9131</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1530-0315</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000394</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24870577</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American College of Sports Medicine</publisher><subject>Acceleration ; Accelerometry - instrumentation ; Adult ; Algorithms ; Child ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Motor Activity ; Reproducibility of Results ; Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted</subject><ispartof>Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 2015-01, Vol.47 (1), p.201-210</ispartof><rights>2015 American College of Sports Medicine</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5384-553831a26afed5a473c8c757d6e506e5981e8a104c299a66877817300ce4f7b63</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5384-553831a26afed5a473c8c757d6e506e5981e8a104c299a66877817300ce4f7b63</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24870577$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Rowlands, Alex V</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fraysse, FranÇois</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Catt, Mike</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stiles, Victoria H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stanley, Rebecca M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eston, Roger G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Olds, Tim S</creatorcontrib><title>Comparability of Measured Acceleration from Accelerometry-Based Activity Monitors</title><title>Medicine and science in sports and exercise</title><addtitle>Med Sci Sports Exerc</addtitle><description>BACKGROUNDAccelerometers that provide triaxial measured acceleration data are now available. However, equivalence of output between brands cannot be assumed and testing is necessary to determine whether features of the acceleration signal are interchangeable. PURPOSEThis study aimed to establish the equivalence of output between two brands of monitor in a laboratory and in a free-living environment. METHODSFor part 1, 38 adults performed nine laboratory-based activities while wearing an ActiGraph GT3X+ and GENEActiv (Gravity Estimator of Normal Everyday Activity) at the hip. For part 2, 58 children age 10–12 yr wore a GT3X+ and GENEActiv at the hip for 7 d in a free-living setting. RESULTSFor part 1, the magnitude of time domain features from the GENEActiv was greater than that from the GT3X+. However, frequency domain features compared well, with perfect agreement of the dominant frequency for 97%–100% of participants for most activities. For part 2, mean daily acceleration measured by the two brands was correlated (r = 0.93, P &lt; 0.001, respectively) but the magnitude was approximately 15% lower for the GT3X+ than that for the GENEActiv at the hip. CONCLUSIONSFrequency domain-based classification algorithms should be transferable between monitors, and it should be possible to apply time domain-based classification algorithms developed for one device to the other by applying an affine conversion on the measured acceleration values. The strong relation between accelerations measured by the two brands suggests that habitual activity level and activity patterns assessed by the GENE and GT3X+ may compare well if analyzed appropriately.</description><subject>Acceleration</subject><subject>Accelerometry - instrumentation</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Child</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Motor Activity</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted</subject><issn>0195-9131</issn><issn>1530-0315</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1LAzEQhoMotlb_gcgevWxNNskmOWrxC1pEqueQZmfp6m5Tk11L_72pbUU8ODAzMDzvzPAidE7wkGRMXU2m0yH-HVSxA9QnnOIUU8IPUR8TxVNFKOmhkxDeIiMoJceolzEpMBeij55Hrlkab2ZVXbXrxJXJBEzoPBTJtbVQgzdt5RZJ6V2zn7gGWr9Ob0z4ptrqcyOduEXVOh9O0VFp6gBnuz5Ar3e3L6OHdPx0_zi6HqeWU8lSHislJstNCQU3TFArreCiyIHjmEoSkIZgZjOlTJ5LISQRFGMLrBSznA7Q5Xbv0ruPDkKrmyrE_2qzANcFTXIqOM9ypiLKtqj1LgQPpV76qjF-rQnWGzN1NFP_NTPKLnYXulkDxY9o714E5BZYuboFH97rbgVez8HU7fz_3V9Cv4AC</recordid><startdate>201501</startdate><enddate>201501</enddate><creator>Rowlands, Alex V</creator><creator>Fraysse, FranÇois</creator><creator>Catt, Mike</creator><creator>Stiles, Victoria H</creator><creator>Stanley, Rebecca M</creator><creator>Eston, Roger G</creator><creator>Olds, Tim S</creator><general>American College of Sports Medicine</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201501</creationdate><title>Comparability of Measured Acceleration from Accelerometry-Based Activity Monitors</title><author>Rowlands, Alex V ; Fraysse, FranÇois ; Catt, Mike ; Stiles, Victoria H ; Stanley, Rebecca M ; Eston, Roger G ; Olds, Tim S</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5384-553831a26afed5a473c8c757d6e506e5981e8a104c299a66877817300ce4f7b63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Acceleration</topic><topic>Accelerometry - instrumentation</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Child</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Motor Activity</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Rowlands, Alex V</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fraysse, FranÇois</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Catt, Mike</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stiles, Victoria H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stanley, Rebecca M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eston, Roger G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Olds, Tim S</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Medicine and science in sports and exercise</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Rowlands, Alex V</au><au>Fraysse, FranÇois</au><au>Catt, Mike</au><au>Stiles, Victoria H</au><au>Stanley, Rebecca M</au><au>Eston, Roger G</au><au>Olds, Tim S</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparability of Measured Acceleration from Accelerometry-Based Activity Monitors</atitle><jtitle>Medicine and science in sports and exercise</jtitle><addtitle>Med Sci Sports Exerc</addtitle><date>2015-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>47</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>201</spage><epage>210</epage><pages>201-210</pages><issn>0195-9131</issn><eissn>1530-0315</eissn><abstract>BACKGROUNDAccelerometers that provide triaxial measured acceleration data are now available. However, equivalence of output between brands cannot be assumed and testing is necessary to determine whether features of the acceleration signal are interchangeable. PURPOSEThis study aimed to establish the equivalence of output between two brands of monitor in a laboratory and in a free-living environment. METHODSFor part 1, 38 adults performed nine laboratory-based activities while wearing an ActiGraph GT3X+ and GENEActiv (Gravity Estimator of Normal Everyday Activity) at the hip. For part 2, 58 children age 10–12 yr wore a GT3X+ and GENEActiv at the hip for 7 d in a free-living setting. RESULTSFor part 1, the magnitude of time domain features from the GENEActiv was greater than that from the GT3X+. However, frequency domain features compared well, with perfect agreement of the dominant frequency for 97%–100% of participants for most activities. For part 2, mean daily acceleration measured by the two brands was correlated (r = 0.93, P &lt; 0.001, respectively) but the magnitude was approximately 15% lower for the GT3X+ than that for the GENEActiv at the hip. CONCLUSIONSFrequency domain-based classification algorithms should be transferable between monitors, and it should be possible to apply time domain-based classification algorithms developed for one device to the other by applying an affine conversion on the measured acceleration values. The strong relation between accelerations measured by the two brands suggests that habitual activity level and activity patterns assessed by the GENE and GT3X+ may compare well if analyzed appropriately.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American College of Sports Medicine</pub><pmid>24870577</pmid><doi>10.1249/MSS.0000000000000394</doi><tpages>10</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0195-9131
ispartof Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 2015-01, Vol.47 (1), p.201-210
issn 0195-9131
1530-0315
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1637552649
source Journals@Ovid Ovid Autoload; MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid LWW Legacy Archive
subjects Acceleration
Accelerometry - instrumentation
Adult
Algorithms
Child
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Motor Activity
Reproducibility of Results
Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted
title Comparability of Measured Acceleration from Accelerometry-Based Activity Monitors
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-14T13%3A26%3A09IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparability%20of%20Measured%20Acceleration%20from%20Accelerometry-Based%20Activity%20Monitors&rft.jtitle=Medicine%20and%20science%20in%20sports%20and%20exercise&rft.au=Rowlands,%20Alex%20V&rft.date=2015-01&rft.volume=47&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=201&rft.epage=210&rft.pages=201-210&rft.issn=0195-9131&rft.eissn=1530-0315&rft_id=info:doi/10.1249/MSS.0000000000000394&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1637552649%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1637552649&rft_id=info:pmid/24870577&rfr_iscdi=true