Accelerometer data reduction: a comparison of four reduction algorithms on select outcome variables.
Saved in:
| Title: | Accelerometer data reduction: a comparison of four reduction algorithms on select outcome variables. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Mâsse LC (AUTHOR), Fuemmeler BF (AUTHOR), Anderson CB (AUTHOR), Matthews CE (AUTHOR), Trost SG (AUTHOR), Catellier DJ (AUTHOR), Treuth M (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. Nov2005 Supplement, Vol. 37, pS544-54. 1p. |
| Abstract: | PURPOSE: Accelerometers are recognized as a valid and objective tool to assess free-living physical activity. Despite the widespread use of accelerometers, there is no standardized way to process and summarize data from them, which limits our ability to compare results across studies. This paper a) reviews decision rules researchers have used in the past, b) compares the impact of using different decision rules on a common data set, and c) identifies issues to consider for accelerometer data reduction. METHODS: The methods sections of studies published in 2003 and 2004 were reviewed to determine what decision rules previous researchers have used to identify wearing period, minimal wear requirement for a valid day, spurious data, number of days used to calculate the outcome variables, and extract bouts of moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA). For this study, four data reduction algorithms that employ different decision rules were used to analyze the same data set. RESULTS: The review showed that among studies that reported their decision rules, much variability was observed. Overall, the analyses suggested that using different algorithms impacted several important outcome variables. The most stringent algorithm yielded significantly lower wearing time, the lowest activity counts per minute and counts per day, and fewer minutes of MVPA per day. An exploratory sensitivity analysis revealed that the most stringent inclusion criterion had an impact on sample size and wearing time, which in turn affected many outcome variables. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that the decision rules employed to process accelerometer data have a significant impact on important outcome variables. Until guidelines are developed, it will remain difficult to compare findings across studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise is the property of Lippincott Williams & Wilkins and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Education Research Complete |
| FullText | Text: Availability: 0 |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: ehh DbLabel: Education Research Complete An: 106409863 AccessLevel: 6 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Accelerometer data reduction: a comparison of four reduction algorithms on select outcome variables. – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Mâsse+LC%22">Mâsse LC</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Fuemmeler+BF%22">Fuemmeler BF</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Anderson+CB%22">Anderson CB</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Matthews+CE%22">Matthews CE</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Trost+SG%22">Trost SG</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Catellier+DJ%22">Catellier DJ</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Treuth+M%22">Treuth M</searchLink> (AUTHOR) – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Medicine+%26+Science+in+Sports+%26+Exercise%22">Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise</searchLink>. Nov2005 Supplement, Vol. 37, pS544-54. 1p. – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: PURPOSE: Accelerometers are recognized as a valid and objective tool to assess free-living physical activity. Despite the widespread use of accelerometers, there is no standardized way to process and summarize data from them, which limits our ability to compare results across studies. This paper a) reviews decision rules researchers have used in the past, b) compares the impact of using different decision rules on a common data set, and c) identifies issues to consider for accelerometer data reduction. METHODS: The methods sections of studies published in 2003 and 2004 were reviewed to determine what decision rules previous researchers have used to identify wearing period, minimal wear requirement for a valid day, spurious data, number of days used to calculate the outcome variables, and extract bouts of moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA). For this study, four data reduction algorithms that employ different decision rules were used to analyze the same data set. RESULTS: The review showed that among studies that reported their decision rules, much variability was observed. Overall, the analyses suggested that using different algorithms impacted several important outcome variables. The most stringent algorithm yielded significantly lower wearing time, the lowest activity counts per minute and counts per day, and fewer minutes of MVPA per day. An exploratory sensitivity analysis revealed that the most stringent inclusion criterion had an impact on sample size and wearing time, which in turn affected many outcome variables. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that the decision rules employed to process accelerometer data have a significant impact on important outcome variables. Until guidelines are developed, it will remain difficult to compare findings across studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] – Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright Label: Group: Ab Data: <i>Copyright of Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise is the property of Lippincott Williams & Wilkins and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=ehh&AN=106409863 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Languages: – Code: eng Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 1 StartPage: S544 Titles: – TitleFull: Accelerometer data reduction: a comparison of four reduction algorithms on select outcome variables. Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Mâsse LC – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Fuemmeler BF – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Anderson CB – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Matthews CE – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Trost SG – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Catellier DJ – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Treuth M IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 02 M: 11 Text: Nov2005 Supplement Type: published Y: 2005 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 01959131 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 37 Titles: – TitleFull: Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
