Journal: The International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

Article Title: Accelerometry cut points for physical activity in underserved African Americans

doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-9-73

Figure Lengend Snippet: Walking pace vs. Actical counts/minute (Note: Table dusting was assigned a pace of 0.0 mph.).

Article Snippet: Unlike the Actigraph, Actical accelerometers are relatively new to the field of PA measurement, and there is a paucity of calibration and validation studies for this device in adults [ ].

Techniques:

Journal: The International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

Article Title: Accelerometry cut points for physical activity in underserved African Americans

doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-9-73

Figure Lengend Snippet: Average pace (mph) and Actical counts/minute for each activity

Article Snippet: Unlike the Actigraph, Actical accelerometers are relatively new to the field of PA measurement, and there is a paucity of calibration and validation studies for this device in adults [ ].

Techniques:

Journal: The International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

Article Title: Accelerometry cut points for physical activity in underserved African Americans

doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-9-73

Figure Lengend Snippet: Walking pace vs. square root transformed Actical counts/minute.

Article Snippet: Unlike the Actigraph, Actical accelerometers are relatively new to the field of PA measurement, and there is a paucity of calibration and validation studies for this device in adults [ ].

Techniques: Transformation Assay

Journal: The BMJ

Article Title: Dose-response associations between accelerometry measured physical activity and sedentary time and all cause mortality: systematic review and harmonised meta-analysis

doi: 10.1136/bmj.l4570

Figure Lengend Snippet: Characteristics of studies included in the meta-analysis

Article Snippet: Data from two studies that assessed physical activity by the Actical accelerometer were only included for time spent in moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity for the dose-response analyses because of the noticeable difference in absolute output for the other exposure variables compared with the Actigraph accelerometer.

Techniques: Filtration, Activity Assay

Journal: Pediatric exercise science

Article Title: Accuracy of Accelerometer Regression Models in Predicting Energy Expenditure and METs in Children and Youth

doi:

Figure Lengend Snippet: Prediction Equations

Article Snippet: For the Actical equations, the highest and lowest levels of agreement were observed for Heil 1R for vigorous intensity [κ = 0.34 (95% CI 0.23–0.44)] and Puyau (AC) equation for low intensity [κ = −0.01 (95% CI −0.09–0.07)], respectively. table ft1 table-wrap mode="anchored" t5 caption a7 Groups Kappa (% Agreement) Kappa (95% CI) Actigraph Equations Light Intensity Freedson 0.40 (68.3) 0.33–0.46 Treuth 0.34 (64.42) 0.28–0.41 Trost 0.22 (77.7) 0.12–0.32 Puyau 0.16 (54.3) 0.11–0.21 Moderate Intensity Freedson 0.15 (57.3) 0.07–0.23 Treuth 0.09 (54.62) 0.01–0.18 Trost 0.34 (68.1) 0.26–0.43 Puyau −0.009 (43.1) −0.09–0.07 Vigorous Intensity Freedson 0.32 (83.3) 0.22–0.41 Treuth 0.25 (82.1) 0.16–0.34 Trost 0.55 (88.3) 0.46–0.65 Puyau 0.03 (81.7) −0.01–0.08 Actical Equations Light Intensity Puyau −0.01 (79.7) −0.09–0.07 Heil 1R 0.32 (80.4) 0.22–0.42 Heil 2R 0.32 (80.3) 0.22–0.42 Moderate Intensity Puyau 0.14 (54.6) 0.07–0.21 Heil 1R 0.26 (61.5) 0.18–0.33 Heil 2R 0.25 (60.9) 0.17–0.32 Vigorous Intensity Puyau 0.27 (84.8) 0.17–0.37 Heil 1R 0.34 (85.8) 0.23–0.44 Heil 2R 0.31 (85.2) 0.20–0.41 Open in a separate window Agreements Between Actual and Predicted Intensity Classifications

Techniques:

Journal: Pediatric exercise science

Article Title: Accuracy of Accelerometer Regression Models in Predicting Energy Expenditure and METs in Children and Youth

doi:

Figure Lengend Snippet: Group Comparisons

Article Snippet: For the Actical equations, the highest and lowest levels of agreement were observed for Heil 1R for vigorous intensity [κ = 0.34 (95% CI 0.23–0.44)] and Puyau (AC) equation for low intensity [κ = −0.01 (95% CI −0.09–0.07)], respectively. table ft1 table-wrap mode="anchored" t5 caption a7 Groups Kappa (% Agreement) Kappa (95% CI) Actigraph Equations Light Intensity Freedson 0.40 (68.3) 0.33–0.46 Treuth 0.34 (64.42) 0.28–0.41 Trost 0.22 (77.7) 0.12–0.32 Puyau 0.16 (54.3) 0.11–0.21 Moderate Intensity Freedson 0.15 (57.3) 0.07–0.23 Treuth 0.09 (54.62) 0.01–0.18 Trost 0.34 (68.1) 0.26–0.43 Puyau −0.009 (43.1) −0.09–0.07 Vigorous Intensity Freedson 0.32 (83.3) 0.22–0.41 Treuth 0.25 (82.1) 0.16–0.34 Trost 0.55 (88.3) 0.46–0.65 Puyau 0.03 (81.7) −0.01–0.08 Actical Equations Light Intensity Puyau −0.01 (79.7) −0.09–0.07 Heil 1R 0.32 (80.4) 0.22–0.42 Heil 2R 0.32 (80.3) 0.22–0.42 Moderate Intensity Puyau 0.14 (54.6) 0.07–0.21 Heil 1R 0.26 (61.5) 0.18–0.33 Heil 2R 0.25 (60.9) 0.17–0.32 Vigorous Intensity Puyau 0.27 (84.8) 0.17–0.37 Heil 1R 0.34 (85.8) 0.23–0.44 Heil 2R 0.31 (85.2) 0.20–0.41 Open in a separate window Agreements Between Actual and Predicted Intensity Classifications

Techniques:

Journal: Pediatric exercise science

Article Title: Accuracy of Accelerometer Regression Models in Predicting Energy Expenditure and METs in Children and Youth

doi:

Figure Lengend Snippet: Actical Bias (95% CI); RMSE for Children

Article Snippet: For the Actical equations, the highest and lowest levels of agreement were observed for Heil 1R for vigorous intensity [κ = 0.34 (95% CI 0.23–0.44)] and Puyau (AC) equation for low intensity [κ = −0.01 (95% CI −0.09–0.07)], respectively. table ft1 table-wrap mode="anchored" t5 caption a7 Groups Kappa (% Agreement) Kappa (95% CI) Actigraph Equations Light Intensity Freedson 0.40 (68.3) 0.33–0.46 Treuth 0.34 (64.42) 0.28–0.41 Trost 0.22 (77.7) 0.12–0.32 Puyau 0.16 (54.3) 0.11–0.21 Moderate Intensity Freedson 0.15 (57.3) 0.07–0.23 Treuth 0.09 (54.62) 0.01–0.18 Trost 0.34 (68.1) 0.26–0.43 Puyau −0.009 (43.1) −0.09–0.07 Vigorous Intensity Freedson 0.32 (83.3) 0.22–0.41 Treuth 0.25 (82.1) 0.16–0.34 Trost 0.55 (88.3) 0.46–0.65 Puyau 0.03 (81.7) −0.01–0.08 Actical Equations Light Intensity Puyau −0.01 (79.7) −0.09–0.07 Heil 1R 0.32 (80.4) 0.22–0.42 Heil 2R 0.32 (80.3) 0.22–0.42 Moderate Intensity Puyau 0.14 (54.6) 0.07–0.21 Heil 1R 0.26 (61.5) 0.18–0.33 Heil 2R 0.25 (60.9) 0.17–0.32 Vigorous Intensity Puyau 0.27 (84.8) 0.17–0.37 Heil 1R 0.34 (85.8) 0.23–0.44 Heil 2R 0.31 (85.2) 0.20–0.41 Open in a separate window Agreements Between Actual and Predicted Intensity Classifications

Techniques:

Journal: Pediatric exercise science

Article Title: Accuracy of Accelerometer Regression Models in Predicting Energy Expenditure and METs in Children and Youth

doi:

Figure Lengend Snippet: Actical Bias (95% CI); RMSE for Adolescents

Article Snippet: For the Actical equations, the highest and lowest levels of agreement were observed for Heil 1R for vigorous intensity [κ = 0.34 (95% CI 0.23–0.44)] and Puyau (AC) equation for low intensity [κ = −0.01 (95% CI −0.09–0.07)], respectively. table ft1 table-wrap mode="anchored" t5 caption a7 Groups Kappa (% Agreement) Kappa (95% CI) Actigraph Equations Light Intensity Freedson 0.40 (68.3) 0.33–0.46 Treuth 0.34 (64.42) 0.28–0.41 Trost 0.22 (77.7) 0.12–0.32 Puyau 0.16 (54.3) 0.11–0.21 Moderate Intensity Freedson 0.15 (57.3) 0.07–0.23 Treuth 0.09 (54.62) 0.01–0.18 Trost 0.34 (68.1) 0.26–0.43 Puyau −0.009 (43.1) −0.09–0.07 Vigorous Intensity Freedson 0.32 (83.3) 0.22–0.41 Treuth 0.25 (82.1) 0.16–0.34 Trost 0.55 (88.3) 0.46–0.65 Puyau 0.03 (81.7) −0.01–0.08 Actical Equations Light Intensity Puyau −0.01 (79.7) −0.09–0.07 Heil 1R 0.32 (80.4) 0.22–0.42 Heil 2R 0.32 (80.3) 0.22–0.42 Moderate Intensity Puyau 0.14 (54.6) 0.07–0.21 Heil 1R 0.26 (61.5) 0.18–0.33 Heil 2R 0.25 (60.9) 0.17–0.32 Vigorous Intensity Puyau 0.27 (84.8) 0.17–0.37 Heil 1R 0.34 (85.8) 0.23–0.44 Heil 2R 0.31 (85.2) 0.20–0.41 Open in a separate window Agreements Between Actual and Predicted Intensity Classifications

Techniques:

Journal: Pediatric exercise science

Article Title: Accuracy of Accelerometer Regression Models in Predicting Energy Expenditure and METs in Children and Youth

doi:

Figure Lengend Snippet: Agreements Between Actual and Predicted Intensity Classifications

Article Snippet: For the Actical equations, the highest and lowest levels of agreement were observed for Heil 1R for vigorous intensity [κ = 0.34 (95% CI 0.23–0.44)] and Puyau (AC) equation for low intensity [κ = −0.01 (95% CI −0.09–0.07)], respectively. table ft1 table-wrap mode="anchored" t5 caption a7 Groups Kappa (% Agreement) Kappa (95% CI) Actigraph Equations Light Intensity Freedson 0.40 (68.3) 0.33–0.46 Treuth 0.34 (64.42) 0.28–0.41 Trost 0.22 (77.7) 0.12–0.32 Puyau 0.16 (54.3) 0.11–0.21 Moderate Intensity Freedson 0.15 (57.3) 0.07–0.23 Treuth 0.09 (54.62) 0.01–0.18 Trost 0.34 (68.1) 0.26–0.43 Puyau −0.009 (43.1) −0.09–0.07 Vigorous Intensity Freedson 0.32 (83.3) 0.22–0.41 Treuth 0.25 (82.1) 0.16–0.34 Trost 0.55 (88.3) 0.46–0.65 Puyau 0.03 (81.7) −0.01–0.08 Actical Equations Light Intensity Puyau −0.01 (79.7) −0.09–0.07 Heil 1R 0.32 (80.4) 0.22–0.42 Heil 2R 0.32 (80.3) 0.22–0.42 Moderate Intensity Puyau 0.14 (54.6) 0.07–0.21 Heil 1R 0.26 (61.5) 0.18–0.33 Heil 2R 0.25 (60.9) 0.17–0.32 Vigorous Intensity Puyau 0.27 (84.8) 0.17–0.37 Heil 1R 0.34 (85.8) 0.23–0.44 Heil 2R 0.31 (85.2) 0.20–0.41 Open in a separate window Agreements Between Actual and Predicted Intensity Classifications

Techniques: