Trial reportPloS one2019
Objective measurement of tummy time in infants (0-6 months): A validation study.
Trial report in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Psychometric Properties of Physical Activity Questionnaires for Children and Adolescents: An Updated Systematic Review.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Pooled it
- Objective Measurement of Posture and Movement in Young Children Using Wearable Sensors and Customised Mathematical Approaches: A Systematic Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Pooled it
- Systematic review of accelerometer-based methods for 24-h physical behavior assessment in young children (0-5 years old).The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2022Pooled it
- Infants' and toddlers' physical activity and sedentary time as measured by accelerometry: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2020Pooled it
- Body position classification using wearable sensors in infants with cerebral palsy.Infant behavior & development · 2026Article
- Tummy Time Tracking: Concurrent-Validity of Wearable Sensors in Home Settings for Term and Preterm Infants.Pediatric physical therapy : the official publication of the Section on Pediatrics of the American Physical Therapy Association · 2025Article
- Accelerometer Thresholds for Estimating Physical Activity Intensity Levels in Infants: A Preliminary Study.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Tummy Time Tracking: Examining Agreement Between Parent Recall and Direct Observation in Infants.The American journal of occupational therapy : official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association · 2024Observational
- Article
- Article
- Longitudinal associations between infant movement behaviours and development.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2022Article
- Miniaturized wireless, skin-integrated sensor networks for quantifying full-body movement behaviors and vital signs in infants.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021Article
- A Contactless Method for Measuring Full-Day, Naturalistic Motor Behavior Using Wearable Inertial Sensors.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Weekly group tummy time classes are feasible and acceptable to mothers with infants: a pilot cluster randomized controlled trial.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2020Article
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
The 2017 Australian and Canadian 24-hour movement guidelines recommend infants receive 30 minutes of tummy time daily. Currently, there are no validated objective measurement tools or devices to assess tummy time. The purpose of this study was to: 1) test the practicality of using devices on infants as an objective measure of tummy time, and 2) test the accuracy of developed algorithms and cut-points for predicting prone posture. Thirty-two healthy infants aged 4 to 25 weeks completed a protocol of 12 positions. Infants were placed in each position for 3 minutes while wearing a MonBaby (chest), GENEActiv (right hip) and two ActiGraphs (right hip and ankle). Direct observation was the criterion measure. The accuracy of the algorithms or cut-points to predict prone on floor, non-prone and prone supported positions were analyzed. Parents also completed a practicality questionnaire. Algorithms and cut-points to classify posture using devices from MonBaby, GENEActiv and ActiGraph (hip and ankle) were 79%, 95%, 90% and 88% accurate at defining tummy time and 100%, 98%, 100% and 96% accurate at defining non-prone positions, respectively. GENEActiv had the smallest mean difference and limits of agreement (-8.4s, limits of agreement [LoA]: -78.2 to 61.3s) for the prone on floor positions and ActiGraph Hip had the smallest mean difference and LoA for the non-prone positions (-0.2s, LoA: -1.2 to 0.9s). The majority of parents agreed all devices were practical and feasible to use with MonBaby being the preferred device. The evaluated algorithms and cut-points for GENEActiv and ActiGraph (hip) are of acceptable accuracy to objectively measure tummy time (time spent prone on floor). Accurate measurement of infant positioning practices will be important in the observation of 24-hour movement guidelines in the early years.
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.