ArticleApplied ergonomics2016
Evaluation of four sensor locations for physical activity assessment.
Article in Applied ergonomics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Measuring nurses' on-shift physical activity and sedentary time by accelerometry or heart rate monitoring: a descriptive case study illustrating the importance of context.Journal of activity, sedentary and sleep behaviors · 2023Article
- Manufacturing worker perceptions of using wearable inertial sensors for multiple work shifts.Applied ergonomics · 2022Article
- A comparison of occupational physical activity and sedentary behavior patterns of nurses working 12-h day and night shifts.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2021Article
- Plantar fasciitis in physicians and nurses: a nationwide population-based study.Industrial health · 2020Article
- How many calories do nurses burn at work? A real-time study of nurses' energy expenditure.Journal of research in nursing : JRN · 2019Article
- Preferred Placement and Usability of a Smart Textile System vs. Inertial Measurement Units for Activity Monitoring.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Article
- Trunk Motion System (TMS) Using Printed Body Worn Sensor (BWS) via Data Fusion Approach.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Direct measurements of physical activity (PA) obtained with inertial measurement units (IMUs) secured to the upper arms and trunk of 36 registered nurses working a full shift were compared to measurements obtained with a commercially-available PA monitor (ActiGraph wGT3X-BT) worn at the waist. Raw accelerations from each device were summarized into PA counts/min and metabolic equivalent (METs) categories using standard definitions. Differences between measurements were examined using repeated measures one-way analyses of variance (ANOVA) and agreement was assessed using Bland-Altman plots. Statistically significant differences were observed between all sensor locations for all PA summary metrics except for between the left and right arm for percentages of work time in the light and moderate counts/min categories. Bland-Altman plots suggested limited agreement between measurements obtained with the IMUs and measurements obtained with the wGT3X-BT waist-worn PA monitor. Results indicate that PA measurements vary substantially based on sensor location.
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.