No Cover Image

Journal article 735 views

Calibration and validation of accelerometry to measure physical activity in adult clinical groups: A systematic review

Mayara S Bianchim, Melitta McNarry Orcid Logo, Lillebeth Larun, Kelly Mackintosh Orcid Logo

Preventive Medicine Reports, Volume: 16, Start page: 101001

Swansea University Authors: Melitta McNarry Orcid Logo, Kelly Mackintosh Orcid Logo

Full text not available from this repository: check for access using links below.

Check full text

DOI (Published version): 10.1016/j.pmedr.2019.101001

Abstract

A growing body of research calibrating and validating accelerometers to classify physical activity intensities has led to a range of cut-points. However, the applicability of current calibration protocols to clinical populations remains to be addressed. The aim of this review was to evaluate the acc...

Full description

Published in: Preventive Medicine Reports
ISSN: 2211-3355
Published: Elsevier BV 2019
Online Access: Check full text

URI: https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa52354
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
first_indexed 2019-10-07T14:22:55Z
last_indexed 2023-03-15T04:06:07Z
id cronfa52354
recordtype SURis
fullrecord <?xml version="1.0"?><rfc1807><datestamp>2023-03-14T10:54:39.9747990</datestamp><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>52354</id><entry>2019-10-07</entry><title>Calibration and validation of accelerometry to measure physical activity in adult clinical groups: A systematic review</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>062f5697ff59f004bc8c713955988398</sid><ORCID>0000-0003-0813-7477</ORCID><firstname>Melitta</firstname><surname>McNarry</surname><name>Melitta McNarry</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author><author><sid>bdb20e3f31bcccf95c7bc116070c4214</sid><ORCID>0000-0003-0355-6357</ORCID><firstname>Kelly</firstname><surname>Mackintosh</surname><name>Kelly Mackintosh</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2019-10-07</date><deptcode>STSC</deptcode><abstract>A growing body of research calibrating and validating accelerometers to classify physical activity intensities has led to a range of cut-points. However, the applicability of current calibration protocols to clinical populations remains to be addressed. The aim of this review was to evaluate the accuracy of the methods for calibrating and validating of accelerometers to estimate physical activity intensity thresholds for clinical populations. Six databases were searched between March and July to 2017 using text words and subject headings. Studies developing moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity cut-points for adult clinical populations were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the health measurement instruments and a specific checklist for calibration studies. A total of 543,741 titles were found and 323 articles were selected for full-text assessment, with 11 meeting the inclusion criteria. Twenty-three different methods for calibration were identified using different models of ActiGraph and Actical accelerometers. Disease-specific cut-points ranged from 591 to 2717 counts&#xB7;min&#x2212;1 and were identified for two main groups of clinical conditions: neuromusculoskeletal disorders and metabolic diseases. The heterogeneity in the available clinical protocols hinders the applicability and comparison of the developed cut-points. As such, a mixed protocol containing a controlled laboratory exercise test and activities of daily-life is suggested. It is recommended that this be combined with a statistical approach that allows for adjustments according to disease severity or the use of machine learning models. Finally, this review highlights the generalisation of cut-points developed on healthy populations to clinical populations is inappropriate.</abstract><type>Journal Article</type><journal>Preventive Medicine Reports</journal><volume>16</volume><journalNumber/><paginationStart>101001</paginationStart><paginationEnd/><publisher>Elsevier BV</publisher><placeOfPublication/><isbnPrint/><isbnElectronic/><issnPrint>2211-3355</issnPrint><issnElectronic/><keywords>ActiGraph, Disease-specific, Cut-points, Medical conditions, Motion</keywords><publishedDay>1</publishedDay><publishedMonth>12</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2019</publishedYear><publishedDate>2019-12-01</publishedDate><doi>10.1016/j.pmedr.2019.101001</doi><url>http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2019.101001</url><notes/><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><department>Sport and Exercise Sciences</department><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><DepartmentCode>STSC</DepartmentCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><apcterm/><funders>This review summarises independent research funded by the Cystic Fibrosis Trust UK under its programme grant for Strategic Research Centres (grant reference No. RP-PG-0108-10011). MSB is a funded PhD student by the Cystic Fibrosis Trust. The funder had no role in the conduct of the study, the writing of the manuscript, or the decision to submit it for publication.</funders><projectreference/><lastEdited>2023-03-14T10:54:39.9747990</lastEdited><Created>2019-10-07T10:58:51.8462785</Created><path><level id="1">Faculty of Science and Engineering</level><level id="2">School of Engineering and Applied Sciences - Sport and Exercise Sciences</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Mayara S</firstname><surname>Bianchim</surname><order>1</order></author><author><firstname>Melitta</firstname><surname>McNarry</surname><orcid>0000-0003-0813-7477</orcid><order>2</order></author><author><firstname>Lillebeth</firstname><surname>Larun</surname><order>3</order></author><author><firstname>Kelly</firstname><surname>Mackintosh</surname><orcid>0000-0003-0355-6357</orcid><order>4</order></author></authors><documents/><OutputDurs/></rfc1807>
spelling 2023-03-14T10:54:39.9747990 v2 52354 2019-10-07 Calibration and validation of accelerometry to measure physical activity in adult clinical groups: A systematic review 062f5697ff59f004bc8c713955988398 0000-0003-0813-7477 Melitta McNarry Melitta McNarry true false bdb20e3f31bcccf95c7bc116070c4214 0000-0003-0355-6357 Kelly Mackintosh Kelly Mackintosh true false 2019-10-07 STSC A growing body of research calibrating and validating accelerometers to classify physical activity intensities has led to a range of cut-points. However, the applicability of current calibration protocols to clinical populations remains to be addressed. The aim of this review was to evaluate the accuracy of the methods for calibrating and validating of accelerometers to estimate physical activity intensity thresholds for clinical populations. Six databases were searched between March and July to 2017 using text words and subject headings. Studies developing moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity cut-points for adult clinical populations were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the health measurement instruments and a specific checklist for calibration studies. A total of 543,741 titles were found and 323 articles were selected for full-text assessment, with 11 meeting the inclusion criteria. Twenty-three different methods for calibration were identified using different models of ActiGraph and Actical accelerometers. Disease-specific cut-points ranged from 591 to 2717 counts·min−1 and were identified for two main groups of clinical conditions: neuromusculoskeletal disorders and metabolic diseases. The heterogeneity in the available clinical protocols hinders the applicability and comparison of the developed cut-points. As such, a mixed protocol containing a controlled laboratory exercise test and activities of daily-life is suggested. It is recommended that this be combined with a statistical approach that allows for adjustments according to disease severity or the use of machine learning models. Finally, this review highlights the generalisation of cut-points developed on healthy populations to clinical populations is inappropriate. Journal Article Preventive Medicine Reports 16 101001 Elsevier BV 2211-3355 ActiGraph, Disease-specific, Cut-points, Medical conditions, Motion 1 12 2019 2019-12-01 10.1016/j.pmedr.2019.101001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2019.101001 COLLEGE NANME Sport and Exercise Sciences COLLEGE CODE STSC Swansea University This review summarises independent research funded by the Cystic Fibrosis Trust UK under its programme grant for Strategic Research Centres (grant reference No. RP-PG-0108-10011). MSB is a funded PhD student by the Cystic Fibrosis Trust. The funder had no role in the conduct of the study, the writing of the manuscript, or the decision to submit it for publication. 2023-03-14T10:54:39.9747990 2019-10-07T10:58:51.8462785 Faculty of Science and Engineering School of Engineering and Applied Sciences - Sport and Exercise Sciences Mayara S Bianchim 1 Melitta McNarry 0000-0003-0813-7477 2 Lillebeth Larun 3 Kelly Mackintosh 0000-0003-0355-6357 4
title Calibration and validation of accelerometry to measure physical activity in adult clinical groups: A systematic review
spellingShingle Calibration and validation of accelerometry to measure physical activity in adult clinical groups: A systematic review
Melitta McNarry
Kelly Mackintosh
title_short Calibration and validation of accelerometry to measure physical activity in adult clinical groups: A systematic review
title_full Calibration and validation of accelerometry to measure physical activity in adult clinical groups: A systematic review
title_fullStr Calibration and validation of accelerometry to measure physical activity in adult clinical groups: A systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Calibration and validation of accelerometry to measure physical activity in adult clinical groups: A systematic review
title_sort Calibration and validation of accelerometry to measure physical activity in adult clinical groups: A systematic review
author_id_str_mv 062f5697ff59f004bc8c713955988398
bdb20e3f31bcccf95c7bc116070c4214
author_id_fullname_str_mv 062f5697ff59f004bc8c713955988398_***_Melitta McNarry
bdb20e3f31bcccf95c7bc116070c4214_***_Kelly Mackintosh
author Melitta McNarry
Kelly Mackintosh
author2 Mayara S Bianchim
Melitta McNarry
Lillebeth Larun
Kelly Mackintosh
format Journal article
container_title Preventive Medicine Reports
container_volume 16
container_start_page 101001
publishDate 2019
institution Swansea University
issn 2211-3355
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.pmedr.2019.101001
publisher Elsevier BV
college_str Faculty of Science and Engineering
hierarchytype
hierarchy_top_id facultyofscienceandengineering
hierarchy_top_title Faculty of Science and Engineering
hierarchy_parent_id facultyofscienceandengineering
hierarchy_parent_title Faculty of Science and Engineering
department_str School of Engineering and Applied Sciences - Sport and Exercise Sciences{{{_:::_}}}Faculty of Science and Engineering{{{_:::_}}}School of Engineering and Applied Sciences - Sport and Exercise Sciences
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2019.101001
document_store_str 0
active_str 0
description A growing body of research calibrating and validating accelerometers to classify physical activity intensities has led to a range of cut-points. However, the applicability of current calibration protocols to clinical populations remains to be addressed. The aim of this review was to evaluate the accuracy of the methods for calibrating and validating of accelerometers to estimate physical activity intensity thresholds for clinical populations. Six databases were searched between March and July to 2017 using text words and subject headings. Studies developing moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity cut-points for adult clinical populations were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the health measurement instruments and a specific checklist for calibration studies. A total of 543,741 titles were found and 323 articles were selected for full-text assessment, with 11 meeting the inclusion criteria. Twenty-three different methods for calibration were identified using different models of ActiGraph and Actical accelerometers. Disease-specific cut-points ranged from 591 to 2717 counts·min−1 and were identified for two main groups of clinical conditions: neuromusculoskeletal disorders and metabolic diseases. The heterogeneity in the available clinical protocols hinders the applicability and comparison of the developed cut-points. As such, a mixed protocol containing a controlled laboratory exercise test and activities of daily-life is suggested. It is recommended that this be combined with a statistical approach that allows for adjustments according to disease severity or the use of machine learning models. Finally, this review highlights the generalisation of cut-points developed on healthy populations to clinical populations is inappropriate.
published_date 2019-12-01T04:04:40Z
_version_ 1763753360678191104
score 11.013082

Similar Items