ArticleFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2022
Methodological heterogeneity biases physical activity metrics derived from the Actigraph GT3X in multiple sclerosis: A rapid review and comparative study.
Article in Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06676618 (Effect of Multimodal Exercise Training on Disease Activity and Functional Status in Patients With Multiple Sclerosis), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 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.
Effect of Multimodal Exercise Training on Disease Activity and Functional Status in Patients With Multiple Sclerosis
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- A low-fat diet improves fatigue in multiple sclerosis: Results from a randomized controlled trial.Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England) · 2023Trial
- Visualising accelerometer-based 24/7 human movement behaviour data: an umbrella review and framework development from the LABDA project.Journal of activity, sedentary and sleep behaviors · 2025Review
- Sensors in Multiple Sclerosis.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2025Review
- MS Pattern Explorer: interactive visual exploration of temporal activity patterns for multiple sclerosis.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Article
- From wearable sensor data to digital biomarker development: ten lessons learned and a framework proposal.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Review
- Non-equivalent, but still valid: Establishing the construct validity of a consumer fitness tracker in persons with multiple sclerosis.PLOS digital health · 2023Article
- Feasibility and scalability of a fitness tracker study: Results from a longitudinal analysis of persons with multiple sclerosis.Frontiers in digital health · 2023Article
- Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation to alleviate fatigue in multiple sclerosis-study protocol for a randomized sham-controlled double-blinded clinical trial.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Physical activity (PA) is reduced in persons with multiple sclerosis (MS), though it is known to aid in symptom and fatigue management. Methods for measuring PA are diverse and the impact of this heterogeneity on study outcomes is unclear. We aimed to clarify this impact by comparing common methods for deriving PA metrics in MS populations. Methods: First, a rapid review of existing literature identified methods for calculating PA in studies which used the Actigraph GT3X in populations with MS. We then compared methods in a prospective study on 42 persons with MS [EDSS 4.5 (3.5-6)] during a voluntary course of inpatient neurorehabilitation. Mixed-effects linear regression identified methodological factors which influenced PA measurements. Non-parametric hypothesis tests, correlations, and agreement statistics assessed overall and pairwise differences between methods. Results: In the rapid review, searches identified 421 unique records. Sixty-nine records representing 51 eligible studies exhibited substantial heterogeneity in methodology and reporting practices. In a subsequent comparative study, multiple methods for deriving six PA metrics (step count, activity counts, total time in PA, sedentary time, time in light PA, time in moderate to vigorous PA), were identified and directly compared. All metrics were sensitive to methodological factors such as the selected preprocessing filter, data source (vertical vs. vector magnitude counts), and cutpoint. Additionally, sedentary time was sensitive to wear time definitions. Pairwise correlation and agreement between methods varied from weak (minimum correlation: 0.15, minimum agreement: 0.03) to perfect (maximum correlation: 1.00, maximum agreement: 1.00). Methodological factors biased both point estimates of PA and correlations between PA and clinical assessments. Conclusions: Methodological heterogeneity of existing literature is high, and this heterogeneity may confound studies which use the Actigraph GT3X. Step counts were highly sensitive to the filter used to process raw accelerometer data. Sedentary time was particularly sensitive to methodology, and we recommend using total time in PA instead. Several, though not all, methods for deriving light PA and moderate to vigorous PA yielded nearly identical results. PA metrics based on vertical axis counts tended to outperform those based on vector magnitude counts. Additional research is needed to establish the relative validity of existing methods.
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.