Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36409738›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Historical development of accelerometry measures and methods for physical activity and sedentary behavior research worldwide: A scoping review of observational studies of adults.

Kelly R Evenson, Elissa Scherer, Kennedy M Peter, Carmen C Cuthbertson, Stephanie Eckman

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Every move counts: but some more than others.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Kelly R EvensonDepartment of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-3720-5830
Elissa SchererRTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-7320-8019
Kennedy M PeterDepartment of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.
Carmen C CuthbertsonDepartment of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.
Stephanie EckmanRTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, United States of America.

Funding

Re-Entry Supplement: Investigation of Oral Microbial Enzymes for the Detection and Treatment of Periodontal DiseaseUL1TR002489 · NCATS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI BUSE, JOHN BERNARD, SHAHEEN, NICHOLAS J · 2018 to 2022
$48.6M
Cardiovascular Epidemiology Training GrantT32HL007055 · NHLBI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Wayne D. Rosamond · 1986 to 2026
$10.0M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002489NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL007055
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This scoping review identified observational studies of adults that utilized accelerometry to assess physical activity and sedentary behavior. Key elements on accelerometry data collection were abstracted to describe current practices and completeness of reporting. We searched three databases (PubMed, Web of Science, and SPORTDiscus) on June 1, 2021 for articles published up to that date. We included studies of non-institutionalized adults with an analytic sample size of at least 500. The search returned 5686 unique records. After reviewing 1027 full-text publications, we identified and abstracted accelerometry characteristics on 155 unique observational studies (154 cross-sectional/cohort studies and 1 case control study). The countries with the highest number of studies included the United States, the United Kingdom, and Japan. Fewer studies were identified from the continent of Africa. Five of these studies were distributed donor studies, where participants connected their devices to an application and voluntarily shared data with researchers. Data collection occurred between 1999 to 2019. Most studies used one accelerometer (94.2%), but 8 studies (5.2%) used 2 accelerometers and 1 study (0.6%) used 4 accelerometers. Accelerometers were more commonly worn on the hip (48.4%) as compared to the wrist (22.3%), thigh (5.4%), other locations (14.9%), or not reported (9.0%). Overall, 12.7% of the accelerometers collected raw accelerations and 44.6% were worn for 24 hours/day throughout the collection period. The review identified 155 observational studies of adults that collected accelerometry, utilizing a wide range of accelerometer data processing methods. Researchers inconsistently reported key aspects of the process from collection to analysis, which needs addressing to support accurate comparisons across studies.

Indexed as

AccelerometrySedentary BehaviorAdultCase-Control StudiesCross-Sectional StudiesExerciseHumans

Identifiers

PMID36409738
PMCPMC9678297

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.