Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15503123›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2005

Moving on land: an explanation of pedometer counts in children.

Joey C Eisenmann, Eric E Wickel

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Daily and Weekly Rehabilitation Delivery for Young Children With Gross Motor Delay: A Randomized Clinical Trial Protocol (the DRIVE Study).Pediatric physical therapy : the official publication of the Section on Pediatrics of the American Physical Therapy Association · 2019
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The contribution of preschool playground factors in explaining children's physical activity during recess.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2008
    Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Joey C EisenmannLaboratory for the Study of Growth, Maturation, and Physical Activity, Department of Health and Human Performance, Iowa State University, 255 Forker, Ames, IA 50011, USA. jce@iastate.edu
Eric E Wickel
Iowa State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The pedometer has become a popular instrument to measure physical activity in humans. The pedometer records physical activity as a simple, raw measure of ambulatory movement: the number of steps taken. Two fundamental questions of the use of the pedometer in pediatric research are: How many steps do children take in a day? How many steps should children accumulate on a daily basis? This raises the question: is 13,000 steps the same amount of physical activity in a 6-year-old and a 12-year-old, given the difference in body size and stride length? Although previous authors have concluded that the number of steps taken is an equivalent amount of physical activity in children regardless of body size, the conclusion has not been explained by a scientific rationale or on an empirical basis depending on the energetics and mechanics of terrestrial locomotion and body size. One approach to explain this question is allometric scaling, which has long been utilized by comparative physiologists to show the relationships between body size and locomotion in animals from shrews to elephants. The aim of this paper was to use allometric equations, examples from comparative mammalian physiology, and results from previous papers that have examined the cost of locomotion in children to provide a better understanding of the interpretation of the pedometer in pediatric research. We show that empirically derived results confirm to allometric equations that consider the relationship between body size and terrestrial locomotion to cover a given distance at a given speed. Thus, the number of steps taken and the energy expended for a particular task is greater in smaller children. However, if the cost of locomotion is related to one step, animals tend to be equally economical, whether large or small. Therefore, the number of steps taken as measured by a pedometer may be interpreted as an equivalent level of physical activity between a 6-year-old and a 12-year-old, if taken at the same speed. However, the locomotor activities in daily life consist of walking and running up- and downhill, carrying loads, and at varying speeds or work intensities, and this exemplifies the limitations of the pedometer. In conclusion, this paper provides a better understanding of the interpretation of pedometer counts and highlights that the findings depend on the expression of physical activity.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalAnthropometryBody ConstitutionChildComputer SimulationGaitHumansLocomotionMonitoring, AmbulatoryMotor ActivityPhysical Examination

Identifiers

PMID15503123
OpenAlexW2032428997

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.