ArticlePloS one2025
Inter-monitor reliability and validity of the fibion accelerometers in a laboratory-based study of functional activities.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccelerometer-based physical activity monitors are designed for placement on several body locations, with popular sites being the wrist, waist/hip, and thigh. Thigh placement is particularly valued for its accuracy in measuring postures and related energy expenditures. However, exploring the outcomes of different thigh wear locations remains an area for further research. This study investigated the inter-monitor reliability of Fibion accelerometers for energy expenditure and activity type classification, and their validity by comparing the Fibion's activity classification against direct observation of a structured activity protocol as the reference standard.
methodsThirty healthy, young adults (aged 21.83 ± 2.80 years; 15 women) wore six Fibion accelerometers on three locations (proximal thigh, 10 cm above the patella, and the front trouser pocket) on both thighs while performing 11 functional activities for 70 minutes in a laboratory setting. Inter-monitor reliability for measuring energy expenditure, activity type and intensity, and accuracy for activity type and intensity classification of the pre-defined functional activities were assessed. Validity was assessed for classifying activity type and intensity.
resultsReliability estimates (intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC 3, k)) implied good to excellent inter-monitor reliability for measuring energy expenditure during nearly all activities. Furthermore, energy expenditure measurements were equivalent between accelerometers in both trouser pockets, and proximal and distal thighs within a bound of ±.1.60 kcal/min. However, the right pocket was not equivalent to either the right proximal thigh or the right distal thigh. The mean activity classification accuracy ranged from 87-92% for activity type and 91-94% for activity intensity for the chosen activities, irrespective of the accelerometer location or side of the body (right vs. left).
conclusionThe Fibion accelerometers reliably measure energy expenditure and accurately classify activity type/intensity for nearly all functional activities, regardless of the thigh wear location or side of the body. However, interchanging pocket and thigh placements is not recommended. Similar studies in free-living settings are further warranted.
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.