Trial reportPloS one2012
A calibration protocol for population-specific accelerometer cut-points in children.
Trial report in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Examination of different accelerometer cut-points for assessing sedentary behaviors in children.PloS one · 2014Trial
- Promoting healthy weight in primary school children through physical activity and nutrition education: a pragmatic evaluation of the CHANGE! randomised intervention study.BMC public health · 2013Trial
- Determination of cut-off points for the Move4 accelerometer and assessment of energy expenditure in children and adolescents aged 6-16 years using manual wheelchairs: a validation and calibration study.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Multi-Component Physical Activity Interventions in the UK Must Consider Determinants of Activity to Increase Effectiveness.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2021Article
- Calibration and validation of accelerometry to measure physical activity in adult clinical groups: A systematic review.Preventive medicine reports · 2019Review
- Estimating Physical Activity in Children Aged 8-11 Years Using Accelerometry: Contributions From Fundamental Movement Skills and Different Accelerometer Placements.Frontiers in physiology · 2019Article
- Physical Activity Levels in Chinese One-Year-Old Children and Their Parents, an Early STOPP China Study.PloS one · 2016Article
- Article
- Accelerometer Cut Points for Physical Activity Assessment of Older Adults with Parkinson's Disease.PloS one · 2015Article
- The opposite prognostic significance of nuclear and cytoplasmic p21 expression in resectable gastric cancer patients.Journal of gastroenterology · 2014Article
- High FAK combined with low JWA expression: clinical prognostic and predictive role for adjuvant fluorouracil-leucovorin-oxaliplatin treatment in resectable gastric cancer patients.Journal of gastroenterology · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo test a field-based protocol using intermittent activities representative of children's physical activity behaviours, to generate behaviourally valid, population-specific accelerometer cut-points for sedentary behaviour, moderate, and vigorous physical activity.
methodsTwenty-eight children (46% boys) aged 10-11 years wore a hip-mounted uniaxial GT1M ActiGraph and engaged in 6 activities representative of children's play. A validated direct observation protocol was used as the criterion measure of physical activity. Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curve analyses were conducted with four semi-structured activities to determine the accelerometer cut-points. To examine classification differences, cut-points were cross-validated with free-play and DVD viewing activities.
resultsCut-points of ≤ 372, >2160 and >4806 counts • min(-1) representing sedentary, moderate and vigorous intensity thresholds, respectively, provided the optimal balance between the related needs for sensitivity (accurately detecting activity) and specificity (limiting misclassification of the activity). Cross-validation data demonstrated that these values yielded the best overall kappa scores (0.97; 0.71; 0.62), and a high classification agreement (98.6%; 89.0%; 87.2%), respectively. Specificity values of 96-97% showed that the developed cut-points accurately detected physical activity, and sensitivity values (89-99%) indicated that minutes of activity were seldom incorrectly classified as inactivity.
conclusionThe development of an inexpensive and replicable field-based protocol to generate behaviourally valid and population-specific accelerometer cut-points may improve the classification of physical activity levels in children, which could enhance subsequent intervention and observational studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.