For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
1
views
28
references
 Top references
cited by
4
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      115
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A new accelerometer (Fibion) device provides valid sedentary and upright time measurements compared to the ActivPAL4 in healthy individuals

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Thigh-worn accelerometers can accurately measure time spent sitting, standing and walking in free-living settings.

          Aim

          To investigate the concurrent validity of a new Fibion accelerometer and a validated ActivPAL4 accelerometer for estimating sedentary and upright time in healthy individuals.

          Methods

          A total of 29 healthy individuals, aged between 18 and 50 years, wore the Fibion and ActivPAL4 devices on the same thigh with a medical adhesive tape during one typical weekday. Concurrent validity of the Fibion and ActivPAL4 was assessed by comparing time spent in sitting, walking and standing using intraclass correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman plots.

          Results

          Intraclass correlation coefficients were ≥0.843 which indicated good to excellent validity between the two devices for measuring sedentary (sitting) and upright (standing and walking) time. Analysis of the Bland Altman plots revealed a reasonable agreement for sitting, standing and walking time between both devices. No proportional bias was evident in the Bland-Altman plots.

          Conclusion

          The Fibion demonstrated good to excellent validity in measuring sedentary and upright time compared to the ActivPAL4 in healthy individuals.

          Abstract

          Validation study; Sitting position; Physical activity; Wearable electronic device.

          Related collections

          Most cited references28

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A Guideline of Selecting and Reporting Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for Reliability Research.

          Terry Koo, Mae Li (2016)
          Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) is a widely used reliability index in test-retest, intrarater, and interrater reliability analyses. This article introduces the basic concept of ICC in the content of reliability analysis.
          Article 0 comments Cited 5392 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Validation of wearable monitors for assessing sedentary behavior.

            Sarah Kozey-Keadle, Amanda Libertine, Kate Lyden … (2011)
            A primary barrier to elucidating the association between sedentary behavior (SB) and health outcomes is the lack of valid monitors to assess SB in a free-living environment. The purpose of this study was to examine the validity of commercially available monitors to assess SB. Twenty overweight (mean ± SD: body mass index = 33.7 ± 5.7 kg·m(-2)) inactive, office workers age 46.5 ± 10.7 yr were directly observed for two 6-h periods while wearing an activPAL (AP) and an ActiGraph GT3X (AG). During the second observation, participants were instructed to reduce sitting time. We assessed the validity of the commonly used cut point of 100 counts per minute (AG100) and several additional AG cut points for defining SB. We used direct observation (DO) using focal sampling with duration coding to record either sedentary (sitting/lying) or nonsedentary behavior. The accuracy and precision of the monitors and the sensitivity of the monitors to detect reductions in sitting time were assessed using mixed-model repeated-measures analyses. On average, the AP and the AG100 underestimated sitting time by 2.8% and 4.9%, respectively. The correlation between the AP and DO was R2 = 0.94, and the AG100 and DO sedentary minutes was R2 = 0.39. Only the AP was able to detect reductions in sitting time. The AG 150-counts-per-minute threshold demonstrated the lowest bias (1.8%) of the AG cut points. The AP was more precise and more sensitive to reductions in sitting time than the AG, and thus, studies designed to assess SB should consider using the AP. When the AG monitor is used, 150 counts per minute may be the most appropriate cut point to define SB.
            Article 0 comments Cited 329 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies (GRRAS) were proposed.

              Jan Kottner, Laurent Audigé, Stig Brorson … (2011)
              Results of reliability and agreement studies are intended to provide information about the amount of error inherent in any diagnosis, score, or measurement. The level of reliability and agreement among users of scales, instruments, or classifications is widely unknown. Therefore, there is a need for rigorously conducted interrater and intrarater reliability and agreement studies. Information about sample selection, study design, and statistical analysis is often incomplete. Because of inadequate reporting, interpretation and synthesis of study results are often difficult. Widely accepted criteria, standards, or guidelines for reporting reliability and agreement in the health care and medical field are lacking. The objective was to develop guidelines for reporting reliability and agreement studies. Eight experts in reliability and agreement investigation developed guidelines for reporting. Fifteen issues that should be addressed when reliability and agreement are reported are proposed. The issues correspond to the headings usually used in publications. The proposed guidelines intend to improve the quality of reporting. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
              Article 0 comments Cited 248 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Ashokan Arumugam
                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): Heliyon
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Heliyon
                Title: Heliyon
                Publisher: Elsevier
                ISSN (Electronic): 2405-8440
                Publication date PMC-release: 15 October 2022
                Publication date Collection: October 2022
                Publication date (Electronic): 15 October 2022
                Volume: 8
                Issue: 10
                Electronic Location Identifier: e11103
                Affiliations
                [a ]Department of Physiotherapy, College of Health Sciences, University of Sharjah, P.O. Box: 27272, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
                [b ]Active Life Lab, South-Eastern Finland University of Applied Sciences, Finland
                [c ]Neuromusculoskeletal Rehabilitation Research Group, RIMHS–Research Institute of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Sharjah, P.O. Box: 27272, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
                [d ]Sustainable Engineering Asset Management Research Group, RISE-Research Institute of Sciences and Engineering, University of Sharjah, P.O. Box: 27272, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
                [e ]Adjunct Faculty, Department of Physiotherapy, Manipal College of Health Professions, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India
                Author notes
                Article
                Publisher Item ID: S2405-8440(22)02391-X Publisher ID: e11103
                DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11103
                PMC ID: 9586911
                PubMed ID: 36281387
                SO-VID: 12a2c67c-977a-42a1-b46f-d6cf350a4ad1
                Copyright © © 2022 The Author(s)
                License:

                This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                Date received : 7 March 2022
                Date revision received : 3 September 2022
                Date accepted : 11 October 2022
                Categories
                Subject: Research Article

                Keywords: validation study,sitting position,physical activity,wearable electronic device
                Data availability:
                Keywords: validation study, sitting position, physical activity, wearable electronic device

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content115

                See all similar

                Cited by4

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors350

                See all reference authors