Validity of the Computer Science and Applications, Inc. (CSA) activity monitor.
Validity of the Computer Science and Applications, Inc. (CSA) activity monitor.
复制标题
Computer Science and Applications, Inc. (CSA) 活动监视器的有效性。
DOI：
10.1249/00005768-199506000-00021
复制
发表时间：
1995
影响因子：
4.1
通讯作者：
Patty S. Freedson
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Edward L. Melanson;Patty S. Freedson
计算机科学与应用公司（Computer Science and Applications，Inc.）(CSA)在三个不同等级的跑步机步行和跑步期间评估加速度计在评估身体活动中的作用。能量消耗（EE）作为标准措施。将CSA数据与Caltrac加速度计收集的数据进行比较。两个加速度计敏感的变化，跑步机速度，但没有歧视的变化，跑步机等级。Caltrac和CSA活动计数与EE（r = 0.66 - 0.82）、相对VO2（r = 0.77 - 0.89）、心率（r = 0.66 - 0.80）、跑步机速度（r = 0.82 - 0.92）以及彼此之间（r = 0.77 - 0.82）显著且相似地相关。CSA数据用于开发模型以预测EE（kcal. min-1）。交叉验证导致实际和预测EE之间的平均差异为0.02 kcal. min-1（SEE = 0.85 kcal. min-1）。CSA模型（-2.86至+3.86 kcal. min-1）和Caltrac模型（-4.17至+2.04 kcal. min-1）的验证组个体差异范围较大。它的结论是，CSA和Caltrac加速度计具有类似的有效性，无论是仪器可以用来估计EE组。
The validity of the Computer Science and Applications, Inc. (CSA) accelerometer in assessing physical activity was assessed during treadmill walking and running at three different grades. Energy expenditure (EE) served as the criterion measure. CSA data were compared to data collected with the Caltrac accelerometer. Both accelerometers were sensitive to changes in treadmill speed, but neither discriminated changes in treadmill grade. Caltrac and CSA activity counts were significantly and similarly correlated with EE (r = 0.66-0.82), relative VO2 (r = 0.77-0.89), heart rate (r = 0.66-0.80), treadmill speed (r = 0.82-0.92), and with each other (r = 0.77-0.82). CSA data were used to develop models to predict EE (kcal.min-1). Cross-validation resulted in a mean difference between actual and predicted EE of 0.02 kcal.min-1 (SEE = 0.85 kcal.min-1). The range of individual differences in the validation group was large for both the CSA model (-2.86 to +3.86 kcal.min-1) and Caltrac (-4.17 to +2.04 kcal.min-1). It is concluded that the CSA and Caltrac accelerometers have similar validity and that either instrument can be used to estimate EE of groups.