ArticleJournal for the measurement of physical behaviour2021
Accelerometer Calibration: The Importance of Considering Functionality.
Article in Journal for the measurement of physical behaviour, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Calibrating Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior for Hip-Worn Accelerometry in Older Women With Two Epoch Lengths: The Women's Health Initiative Objective Physical Activity and Cardiovascular Health Calibration Study.Journal for the measurement of physical behaviour · 2023Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo compare the accuracy and precision of a hip-worn accelerometer to predict energy cost during structured activities across motor performance and disease conditions.
methods118 adults self-identifying as healthy (
resultsAll activities' accelerometer counts per minute (CPM) were 29.5-72.6% less for those with disease compared with those who were healthy. The predicted MET bias was similar across disease, -0.49 (-0.71, -0.27) for arthritis, -0.38 (-0.53, -0.22) for healthy, -0.44 (-0.68, -0.20) for MS, -0.34 (-0.58, -0.09) for Parkinson's, and -0.30 (-0.54, -0.06) for stroke. For functional impairment, there was a graded reduction in CPM for all activities: Group 1, 1,215 CPM (1,129, 1,301); Group 2, 789 CPM (695, 884); and Group 3, 343 CPM (220, 466). The predicted MET bias revealed similar results across the Group 1, -0.37 METs (-0.52, -0.23); Group 2, -0.44 METs (-0.60, -0.28); and Group 3, -0.33 METs (-0.55, -0.13). The Bayesian information criteria showed a better model fit for functional impairment compared with disease condition.
conclusionUsing functionality to improve accelerometer calibration could decrease variability and warrants further exploration to improve accelerometer prediction of physical activity.
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.