ArticleClinical physiology and functional imaging2023
An evaluation of data processing when using the ActiGraph GT3X accelerometer in non-ambulant children and adolescents with cerebral palsy.
Article in Clinical physiology and functional imaging, 2023. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- An evaluation of data processing when using the ActiGraph GT3X accelerometer in non-ambulant children and adolescents with cerebral palsy.Clinical physiology and functional imaging · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate vertical acceleration, vector magnitude, non-wear time, valid day classifications, and valid period classifications in the data processing phase when using the ActiGraph GT3X accelerometer in non-ambulant children and adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP). MATERIAL AND
methodsAccelerometer data retrieved from 33 non-ambulant children and adolescents (4-17 years) with CP were analysed. Comparisons of (i) vertical acceleration versus vector magnitude, (ii) two different non-wear times, (iii) three different settings to classify a day as valid and (iv) two different settings to classify a period as valid were made. RESULTS AND
conclusionsVector magnitude and a non-wear time of at least 90 consecutive minutes statistically significantly increased minutes recorded per day, especially for sedentary time. There was a statistically significant difference in numbers of valid days depending on time criteria set to determine a valid day, whereas there was no statistically significant difference in valid periods using 3 compared to 4 days. This study suggests using the pre-settings in ActiLife; vector magnitude, non-wear time of 90 consecutive minutes, 500 min recorded per day with periods of at least 3 valid days when assessing physical activity objectively by the ActiGraph GT3X accelerometer in non-ambulant children and adolescents with CP.
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.