Agreement between activPAL and ActiGraph for assessing children's sedentary time.
Agreement between activPAL and ActiGraph for assessing children's sedentary time.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/1479-5868-9-15
复制
发表时间：
2012-02-19
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Timperio A
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ridgers ND;Salmon J;Ridley K;O'Connell E;Arundell L;Timperio A
加速度计被用来测定儿童久坐的时间。然而，由于坐着的时间可能对健康有害，因此需要进行研究，以检验加速度计的久坐截断点是否反映了儿童坐着的时间。本研究的目的是：a)使用ActiGraph （aP）检查久坐时间的ActiGraph （AG）截断点与客观评估的自由生活坐着时间和坐着加站立时间之间的一致性；b)确定断点，以确定坐着的时间和坐着加站着的时间。48名8-12岁的儿童（54%的男孩）连续两个上学日（下午9-3:30）佩戴了腰装AG和大腿装aP。AG数据在50个计数·分钟-1的增量中使用50-850个计数·分钟-1之间的17个切点进行分析，以确定上课时间、休息时间和上学时间的久坐时间。坐着的时间和坐着加站着的时间都是从aP中得到的。计算了AG50至AG850久坐时间与久坐时间和久坐加站立时间之间的一致性界限。受试者操作特征（ROC）分析确定了AG切割点，该切割点对坐姿和坐姿加站立时间的敏感性和特异性最大。aP坐着时间和AG久坐时间之间的平均偏差最小，上课时间为AG150（3.8分钟），休息时间为AG50（-0.8分钟），上课时间为AG100（-5.2分钟）。对于坐着和站立时间，AG850的偏差最小。ROC分析显示，坐下时间的最佳切割点为96计数·min-1 (AUC = 0.75)，具有可接受的灵敏度（71.7%）和特异性（67.8%）。坐位加站立没有最佳切割点（AUC = 0.51）。儿童在上学期间的自由生活坐着时间估计可以使用100计数·分钟-1的AG切割点来获得。较高的久坐截点可以同时记录坐着和站着的时间。
Accelerometers have been used to determine the amount of time that children spend sedentary. However, as time spent sitting may be detrimental to health, research is needed to examine whether accelerometer sedentary cut-points reflect the amount of time children spend sitting. The aim of this study was to: a) examine agreement between ActiGraph (AG) cut-points for sedentary time and objectively-assessed periods of free-living sitting and sitting plus standing time using the activPAL (aP); and b) identify cut-points to determine time spent sitting and sitting plus standing. Forty-eight children (54% boys) aged 8-12 years wore a waist-mounted AG and thigh-mounted aP for two consecutive school days (9-3:30 pm). AG data were analyzed using 17 cut-points between 50-850 counts·min-1 in 50 counts·min-1 increments to determine sedentary time during class-time, break time and school hours. Sitting and sitting plus standing time were obtained from the aP for these periods. Limits of agreement were computed to evaluate bias between AG50 to AG850 sedentary time and sitting and sitting plus standing time. Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) analyses identified AG cut-points that maximized sensitivity and specificity for sitting and sitting plus standing time. The smallest mean bias between aP sitting time and AG sedentary time was AG150 for class time (3.8 minutes), AG50 for break time (-0.8 minutes), and AG100 for school hours (-5.2 minutes). For sitting plus standing time, the smallest bias was observed for AG850. ROC analyses revealed an optimal cut-point of 96 counts·min-1 (AUC = 0.75) for sitting time, which had acceptable sensitivity (71.7%) and specificity (67.8%). No optimal cut-point was obtained for sitting plus standing (AUC = 0.51). Estimates of free-living sitting time in children during school hours can be obtained using an AG cut-point of 100 counts·min-1. Higher sedentary cut-points may capture both sitting and standing time.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
5.7
作者：
Owen N;Healy GN;Matthews CE;Dunstan DW
通讯作者：
Dunstan DW
影响因子：
7.7
作者：
Hamilton, Marc T.;Hamilton, Deborah G.;Zderic, Theodore W.
通讯作者：
Zderic, Theodore W.
影响因子：
39.3
作者：
Healy, Genevieve N.;Matthews, Charles E.;Owen, Neville
通讯作者：
Owen, Neville
DOI：
10.1249/mss.0b013e31820ce174
发表时间：
2011-08-01
期刊：
MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE
影响因子：
--
作者：
Kozey-Keadle, Sarah;Libertine, Amanda;Freedson, Patty S.
通讯作者：
Freedson, Patty S.
影响因子：
3.4
作者：
Evenson, Kelly R.;Catellier, Diane J.;McMurray, Robert G.
通讯作者：
McMurray, Robert G.