Accuracy of intensity and inclinometer output of three activity monitors for identification of sedentary behavior and light-intensity activity.
Accuracy of intensity and inclinometer output of three activity monitors for identification of sedentary behavior and light-intensity activity.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1155/2012/460271
复制
发表时间：
2012
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Mahar MT
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Carr LJ;Mahar MT
目的。检查三种身体活动监测器在各种久坐和光强度活动期间强度和倾斜计输出的准确性。 方法。 36 名参与者佩戴三台身体活动监测仪（ActiGraph GT1M、ActiGraph GT3X+ 和 StepWatch），在受控设置下完成久坐（躺着、坐着看电视、坐着使用电脑和静止不动）、轻度（步行 1.0 英里/小时、踩踏 7.0 英里/小时、踩踏 15.0 英里/小时）强度活动。针对每个监视器和阈值评估正确分类强度的准确性。还评估了 GT3X+ 测斜仪功能 (GT3X+Incl) 正确识别解剖位置的准确性。检查了直接观察与监测仪记录的久坐行为时间和光强度之间的百分比一致性。结果。 所有使用所有阈值的监测器都根据强度输出准确识别了超过 80% 的久坐行为和 60% 的光强度步行时间。 StepWatch 在检测踩踏时间方面最准确，但无法检测踏板工作负荷。 GT3X+Incl 在 70% 的所有活动中准确识别了解剖位置，但在区分不同强度的活动方面表现出局限性。结论。我们的研究结果表明，所有三个监测器都能准确测量大多数久坐和光强度活动，尽管监测器的选择应基于研究的特定需求。
Purpose. To examine the accuracy of intensity and inclinometer output of three physical activity monitors during various sedentary and light-intensity activities. Methods. Thirty-six participants wore three physical activity monitors (ActiGraph GT1M, ActiGraph GT3X+, and StepWatch) while completing sedentary (lying, sitting watching television, sitting using computer, and standing still) light (walking 1.0 mph, pedaling 7.0 mph, pedaling 15.0 mph) intensity activities under controlled settings. Accuracy for correctly categorizing intensity was assessed for each monitor and threshold. Accuracy of the GT3X+ inclinometer function (GT3X+Incl) for correctly identifying anatomical position was also assessed. Percentage agreement between direct observation and the monitor recorded time spent in sedentary behavior and light intensity was examined. Results. All monitors using all thresholds accurately identified over 80% of sedentary behaviors and 60% of light-intensity walking time based on intensity output. The StepWatch was the most accurate in detecting pedaling time but unable to detect pedal workload. The GT3X+Incl accurately identified anatomical position during 70% of all activities but demonstrated limitations in discriminating between activities of differing intensity. Conclusions. Our findings suggest that all three monitors accurately measure most sedentary and light-intensity activities although choice of monitors should be based on study-specific needs.