Absolute intensity thresholds for tri-axial wrist and waist accelerometer-measured movement behaviors in adults.

AIM: This study was aimed to: (1) compare raw triaxial acceleration data from GENEActiv (GA) and ActiGraph GT3X+ (AG) placed on the non-dominant wrist; (2) compare AG placed on the non-dominant and dominant wrist, and waist; (3) derive brand- and placement-specific absolute intensity thresholds for inactive and sedentary time, and physical activity intensity in adults. METHODS: Eighty-six adults (44 men; 34.6 ± 10.8 years) performed nine activities while simultaneously wearing GA and AG on wrist and waist. Acceleration (in gravitational equivalent units; mg) was compared with oxygen uptake (measured with indirect calorimetry). RESULTS: Increases in acceleration mirrored increases in intensity of activities, regardless of device brand and placement. Differences in acceleration between GA and AG worn at the non-dominant wrist were small but tended to be high at lower intensity activities. Thresholds for differentiating inactivity (<1.5 MET) from activity (≥1.5 MET) ranged from 25 mg (AG non-dominant wrist; sensitivity 93%, specificity 95%) to 40 mg (AG waist; sensitivity 78%, specificity 100%). For moderate intensity (≥3 METs), thresholds ranged from 65 mg (AG waist; sensitivity 96%, specificity 94%) to 92 mg (GA non-dominant; sensitivity 93%, specificity 98%); vigorous intensity (≥6 METs) thresholds ranged from 190 mg (AG waist; sensitivity 82%, specificity 92%) to 283 mg (GA non-dominant; sensitivity 93%, specificity 98%). CONCLUSION: Raw triaxial acceleration outputs from two widely used accelerometer brands may have limited comparability in low intensity activities. Thresholds derived in this study can be utilized in adults to reasonably classify movement behaviors into categories of intensity.

Calibration of raw accelerometer data to measure physical activity: A systematic review.

Most of calibration studies based on accelerometry were developed using count-based analyses. In contrast, calibration studies based on raw acceleration signals are relatively recent and their evidences are incipient. The aim of the current study was to systematically review the literature in order to summarize methodological characteristics and results from raw data calibration studies. The review was conducted up to May 2017 using four databases: PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science. Methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Landis and Koch's guidelines. Initially, 1669 titles were identified and, after assessing titles, abstracts and full-articles, 20 studies were included. All studies were conducted in high-income countries, most of them with relatively small samples and specific population groups. Physical activity protocols were different among studies and the indirect calorimetry was the criterion measure mostly used. High mean values of sensitivity, specificity and accuracy from the intensity thresholds of cut-point-based studies were observed (93.7%, 91.9% and 95.8%, respectively). The most frequent statistical approach applied was machine learning-based modelling, in which the mean coefficient of determination was 0.70 to predict physical activity energy expenditure. Regarding the recognition of physical activity types, the mean values of accuracy for sedentary, household and locomotive activities were 82.9%, 55.4% and 89.7%, respectively. In conclusion, considering the construct of physical activity that each approach assesses, linear regression, machine-learning and cut-point-based approaches presented promising validity parameters.