ArticlePeerJ2020
Reliability and validity of the physical activity monitor for assessing energy expenditures in sedentary, regularly exercising, non-endurance athlete, and endurance athlete adults.
Article in PeerJ, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Knowledge on physical activity participation among secondary school students in Kakamega County, Kenya: descriptive study on 422 students aged 14-18 years.BMJ open sport & exercise medicine · 2025Article
- Wearable and Portable Devices for Acquisition of Cardiac Signals while Practicing Sport: A Scoping Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Kinect and Few-Shot Technology-Based Simulation of Physical Fitness and Health Training Model for Basketball Players in Plateau Area.Computational intelligence and neuroscience · 2022Article
- Concurrent validity of the combined HRV/ACC sensor and physical activity diary when monitoring physical activity in university students during free-living days.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Modeling Energy Expenditure Estimation in Occupational Context by Actigraphy: A Multi Regression Mixed-Effects Model.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInertial sensors, such as accelerometers, serve as convenient devices to predict the energy expenditures (EEs) during physical activities by a predictive equation. Although the accuracy of estimate EEs especially matter to athletes receive physical training, most EE predictive equations adopted in accelerometers are based on the general population, not athletes. This study included the heart rate reserve (HRR) as a compensatory parameter for physical intensity and derived new equations customized for sedentary, regularly exercising, non-endurance athlete, and endurance athlete adults.
methodsWith indirect calorimetry as the criterion measure (CM), the EEs of participants on a treadmill were measured, and vector magnitudes (VM), as well as HRR, were simultaneously recorded by a waist-worn accelerometer with a heart rate monitor. Participants comprised a sedentary group (SG), an exercise-habit group (EHG), a non-endurance group (NEG), and an endurance group (EG), with 30 adults in each group.
resultsEE predictive equations were revised using linear regression with cross-validation on VM, HRR, and body mass (BM). The modified model demonstrates valid and reliable predictions across four populations (Pearson correlation coefficient,
conclusionUsing accelerometers with a heart rate monitorcan accurately predict EEs of athletes and non-athletes with an optimized predictive equation integrating the VM, HRR, and BM parameters.
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.