Wrist accelerometer cut-points for classifying sedentary behavior in children

van Loo, Christiana, Okely, Anthony, Batterham, Marijka, Hinkley, Trina, Ekelund, Ulf, Brage, Soren, Reilly, John, , Jones, Rachel, Janssen, Xanne, & Cliff, Dylan (2017) Wrist accelerometer cut-points for classifying sedentary behavior in children. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 49(4), pp. 813-822.

View at publisher

Description

Introduction To examine the validity and accuracy of wrist accelerometers for classifying sedentary behavior (SB) in children. Methods Fifty-seven children (5-8y and 9-12y) completed a ~170min protocol including 15 semi-structured activities and transitions. Nine ActiGraph (GT3X+) and two GENEActiv wrist cut-points were evaluated. Direct observation was the criterion measure. The accuracy of wrist cut-points was compared to that achieved by the ActiGraph hip cut-point (≤25 counts/15s) and the thigh-mounted activPAL3TM. Analyses included equivalence testing, Bland-Altman procedures and area under the receiver operating curve (ROC-AUC). Results The most accurate ActiGraph wrist cut-points (Kim, vector magnitude: ≤3958 counts/60s and vertical axis: ≤1756 counts/60s) demonstrated good classification accuracy (ROC-AUC = 0.85-0.86) and accurately estimated SB time in 5-8y (equivalence p=0.02; mean bias: 4.1%, limits of agreement [LoA]: -20.1-28.4%) and 9-12y (equivalence p<0.01; -2.5%, -27.9-22.9%). Mean bias of SB time estimates from Kim were smaller than ActiGraph hip (5-8y: 15.8%, -5.7-37.2%; 9-12y: 17.8%, -3.9-39.5%) and similar to or smaller than activPAL3TM (5-8y: 12.6%, -39.8-14.7%; 9-12y: -1.4%, -13.9-11.0%), although classification accuracy was similar to ActiGraph hip (ROC-AUC = 0.85) but lower than activPAL3TM (ROC-AUC = 0.92-0.97). Mean bias (5-8y: 6.5%, -16.1-29.1%; 9-12y: 10.5%, -13.6-34.6%) for the most accurate GENEActiv wrist cut-point (Schaefer: ≤0.19g) was smaller than ActiGraph hip, and activPAL3TM in 5-8y, but larger than activPAL3TM in 9-12y. However, SB time estimates from Schaefer were not equivalent to direct observation (equivalence p>0.05) and classification accuracy (ROC-AUC = 0.79-0.80) was lower than for ActiGraph hip and activPAL3TM. Conclusion The most accurate SB ActiGraph (Kim) and GENEActiv (Schaefer) wrist cut-points can be applied in children with similar confidence as the ActiGraph hip cut-point (≤25 counts/15s), although activPAL3TM was generally more accurate.

Impact and interest:

26 citations in Scopus
20 citations in Web of Science®
Search Google Scholar™

Citation counts are sourced monthly from Scopus and Web of Science® 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 the Google Scholar™ indexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.

Full-text downloads:

116 since deposited on 15 Mar 2017
24 in the past twelve months

Full-text downloads displays the total number of times this work’s files (e.g., a PDF) have been downloaded from QUT ePrints as well as the number of downloads in the previous 365 days. The count includes downloads for all files if a work has more than one.

ID Code: 104444
Item Type: Contribution to Journal (Journal Article)
Refereed: Yes
ORCID iD:
Trost, Stewartorcid.org/0000-0001-9587-3944
Measurements or Duration: 10 pages
Keywords: Activity monitor, objective measurement, physical activity, sitting, validation, youth
DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000001158
ISSN: 1530-0315
Pure ID: 33209879
Divisions: Past > QUT Faculties & Divisions > Faculty of Health
Past > Institutes > Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation
Funding:
Copyright Owner: Consult author(s) regarding copyright matters
Copyright Statement: This work is covered by copyright. Unless the document is being made available under a Creative Commons Licence, you must assume that re-use is limited to personal use and that permission from the copyright owner must be obtained for all other uses. If the document is available under a Creative Commons License (or other specified license) then refer to the Licence for details of permitted re-use. It is a condition of access that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. If you believe that this work infringes copyright please provide details by email to qut.copyright@qut.edu.au
Deposited On: 15 Mar 2017 03:10
Last Modified: 02 Apr 2024 23:51