Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

The aim was to establish which postural and physical activity outcomes are comparable across different accelerometer brands worn on the thigh when processed using open-source methods. Twenty participants wore four accelerometers (Axivity, ActiGraph, activPAL, GENEActiv) for three free-living days. Postural and physical activity outputs (average acceleration, intensity gradient, intensity of the most active 30 min, 60 min, and 8 h) were generated. Postural outputs: Mean absolute percent errors (MAPEs) were low, reliability excellent, and equivalency within the 5% zone across all monitor pairings for sitting/lying and upright times, but not specific lying postures. Physical activity outputs: MAPEs were higher and reliability lower than for sitting/lying and upright time. However, the majority of the outcomes were within the 10% equivalency zone for Axivity/GENEActiv and Axivity/ActiGraph pairings. Total sitting/lying and upright times show strong potential for harmonization across studies utilizing different thigh-worn accelerometers. The majority of acceleration outcomes compare well for Axivity, GENEActiv, and ActiGraph.

Original publication

DOI

10.1080/1091367X.2021.1944154

Type

Journal article

Journal

Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science

Publication Date

01/01/2022

Volume

26

Pages

39 - 50