ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Validation of an Algorithm for Measurement of Sedentary Behaviour in Community-Dwelling Older Adults.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Use of Wearable Technology for Measuring and Characterizing Sedentary Behavior in People With Mild Cognitive Impairment and Dementia: Systematic Review.JMIR aging · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- Neural Network-Based Granular Activity Recognition from Accelerometers: Assessing Generalizability Across Diverse Mobility Profiles.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Berg Balance Scale Scoring System for Balance Evaluation by Leveraging Attention-Based Deep Learning with Wearable IMU Sensors.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Exploring the Effect of Sampling Frequency on Real-World Mobility, Sedentary Behaviour, Physical Activity and Sleep Outcomes Measured with Wearable Devices in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Feasibility, Usability and Practical Considerations.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
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
Abstract
Accurate measurement of sedentary behaviour in older adults is informative and relevant. Yet, activities such as sitting are not accurately distinguished from non-sedentary activities (e.g., upright activities), especially in real-world conditions. This study examines the accuracy of a novel algorithm to identify sitting, lying, and upright activities in community-dwelling older people in real-world conditions. Eighteen older adults wore a single triaxial accelerometer with an onboard triaxial gyroscope on their lower back and performed a range of scripted and non-scripted activities in their homes/retirement villages whilst being videoed. A novel algorithm was developed to identify sitting, lying, and upright activities. The algorithm's sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for identifying scripted sitting activities ranged from 76.9% to 94.8%. For scripted lying activities: 70.4% to 95.7%. For scripted upright activities: 75.9% to 93.1%. For non-scripted sitting activities: 92.3% to 99.5%. No non-scripted lying activities were captured. For non-scripted upright activities: 94.3% to 99.5%. The algorithm could, at worst, overestimate or underestimate sedentary behaviour bouts by ±40 s, which is within a 5% error for sedentary behaviour bouts. These results indicate good to excellent agreement for the novel algorithm, providing a valid measure of sedentary behaviour in community-dwelling older adults.
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.