Sit versus stand : can sitting be accurately identified using MTI accelerometer data?
Marshall, Alison L., Rachele, Jerome N., Marshall, Lee-Anne J., Lai, Junior, & Jones, Lee V. (2010) Sit versus stand : can sitting be accurately identified using MTI accelerometer data? In American College of Sports Medicine Annual Meeting 2010, 2-5 June 2010, Baltimore, ML.
High levels of sitting have been linked with poor health outcomes. Previously a pragmatic MTI accelerometer data cut-point (100 count/min-1) has been used to estimate sitting. Data on the accuracy of this cut-point is unavailable. PURPOSE: To ascertain whether the 100 count/min-1 cut-point accurately isolates sitting from standing activities. METHODS: Participants fitted with an MTI accelerometer were observed performing a range of sitting, standing, light & moderate activities. 1-min epoch MTI data were matched to observed activities, then re-categorized as either sitting or not using the 100 count/min-1 cut-point. Self-report demographics and current physical activity were collected. Generalized estimating equation for repeated measures with a binary logistic model analyses (GEE), corrected for age, gender and BMI, were conducted to ascertain the odds of the MTI data being misclassified. RESULTS: Data were from 26 healthy subjects (8 men; 50% aged <25 years; mean BMI (SD) 22.7(3.8)m/kg2). MTI sitting and standing data mode was 0 count/min-1, with 46% of sitting activities and 21% of standing activities recording 0 count/min-1. The GEE was unable to accurately isolate sitting from standing activities using the 100 count/min-1 cut-point, since all sitting activities were incorrectly predicted as standing (p=0.05). To further explore the sensitivity of MTI data to delineate sitting from standing, the upper 95% confidence interval of the mean for the sitting activities (46 count/min-1) was used to re-categorise the data; this resulted in the GEE correctly classifying 49% of sitting, and 69% of standing activities. Using the 100 count/min-1 cut-point the data were re-categorised into a combined ‘sit/stand’ category and tested against other light activities: 88% of sit/stand and 87% of light activities were accurately predicted. Using Freedson’s moderate cut-point of 1952 count/min-1 the GEE accurately predicted 97% of light vs. 90% of moderate activities. CONCLUSION: The distributions of MTI recorded sitting and standing data overlap considerably, as such the 100 count/min -1 cut-point did not accurately isolate sitting from other static standing activities. The 100 count/min -1 cut-point more accurately predicted sit/stand vs. other movement orientated activities.
Impact and interest:
Citation countsare sourced monthly fromand citation databases.
These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.
Citations counts from theindexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.
|Item Type:||Conference Item (Poster)|
|Keywords:||Physical Activity, Accelerometer, Sedentary|
|Subjects:||Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES (110000) > PUBLIC HEALTH AND HEALTH SERVICES (111700)|
Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES (110000) > PUBLIC HEALTH AND HEALTH SERVICES (111700) > Health Promotion (111712)
|Divisions:||Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > Faculty of Health|
Current > Schools > School of Exercise & Nutrition Sciences
Current > Schools > School of Public Health & Social Work
|Deposited On:||06 Oct 2011 08:32|
|Last Modified:||06 Oct 2011 08:32|
Repository Staff Only: item control page