ArticlePloS one2024
A comparative analysis of 24-hour movement behaviors features using different accelerometer metrics in adults: Implications for guideline compliance and associations with cardiometabolic health.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Digital Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior Interventions for Community-Living Adults: Umbrella Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- How a 10-minute bout requirement for physical activity affects guideline adherence estimates, Germany.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2026Article
- Intensity-specific physical activity and mortality in 147,414 adults: a pooled accelerometer analysis.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2026Article
- Moving beyond cancer: longitudinal changes in 24-hour movement behaviors and their association with quality of life in breast cancer survivors.Journal of activity, sedentary and sleep behaviors · 2026Article
- Article
- Impact of accelerometer epoch summary measure on associations between physical activity and all-cause mortality in Whitehall II and UK Biobank.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- 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
- The Ability of Monitor-Independent Movement Summary Units, Euclidean Norm Minus One, and Mean Amplitude Deviation to Harmonize Accelerometry Data Across Research-Grade and Consumer Wearable Devices During Simulated Free-Living Physical Activity in Children.Journal for the measurement of physical behaviour · 2025Article
- Harmonizing measurement tools: examining the concurrent validity of the Daily Activity Behaviors Questionnaire compared to the ActiGraph to assess 24-hour movement behaviors among adults.BMC public health · 2024Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMovement behavior features such as time use estimates, average acceleration and intensity gradient are crucial in understanding associations with cardiometabolic health. The aim of this study was to 1) compare movement behavior features processed by commonly used accelerometer metrics among adults (i.e. Euclidian Norm Minus One (ENMO), Mean Amplitude Deviation (MAD) and counts per minute (CPM)), 2) investigate the impact of accelerometer metrics on compliance with movement behavior guidelines, and 3) explore potential variations in the association between movement behavior features and cardiometabolic variables depending on the chosen metric.
methodsThis cross-sectional study collected movement behavior features (Actigraph GT3X+) and cardiometabolic variables. Accelerometer data were analyzed by four metrics, i.e. ENMO, MAD, and CPM vertical axis and CPM vector magnitude (GGIR). Intraclass correlations and Bland‒Altman plots identified metric differences for time use in single movement behaviors (physical activity, sedentary behavior), average acceleration and intensity gradient. Regression models across the four metrics were used to explore differences in 24-hour movement behaviors (24h-MBs; compositional variable) as for exploration of associations with cardiometabolic variables.
resultsMovement behavior data from 213 Belgian adults (mean age 45.8±10.8 years, 68.5% female) differed according to the metric used, with ENMO representing the most sedentary movement behavior profile and CPM vector magnitude representing the most active profile. Compliance rates for meeting integrated 24h-MBs guidelines varied from 0-25% depending on the metric used. Furthermore, the strength and direction of associations between movement behavior features and cardiometabolic variables (body mass index, waist circumference, fat% and HbA1c) differed by the choice of metric.
conclusionThe metric used during data processing markedly influenced cut-point dependent time use estimates and cut-point independent average acceleration and intensity gradient, impacting guideline compliance and associations with cardiometabolic variables. Consideration is necessary when comparing findings from accelerometry studies to inform public health guidelines.
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.