Dataset Information

Concurrent and discriminant validity of ActiGraph waist and wrist cut-points to measure sedentary behaviour, activity level, and posture in office work.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Sedentary Behaviour (SB) gets an increasing attention from ergonomics and public health due to its associated detrimental health effects. A large number of studies record SB with ActiGraph counts-per-minute cut-points, but we still lack valid information about what the cut-points tell us about office work. This study therefore analysed the concurrent and discriminant validity of commonly used cut-points to measure SB, activity level, and posture.

Methods

Thirty office workers completed four office tasks at three workplaces (conventional chair, activity-promoting chair, and standing desk) while wearing two ActiGraphs (waist and wrist). Indirect calorimetry and prescribed posture served as reference criteria. Generalized Estimation Equations analysed workplace and task effects on the activity level and counts-per-minute, and kappa statistics and ROC curves analysed the cut-point validity.

Results

The activity-promoting chair (p ConclusionsActiGraph counts-per-minute for waist and wrist placement were - independently of the chosen cut-point - a measure for activity level and not for SB or posture, and the cut-points performed better to detect task effects than workplace effects. Waist cut-points were most valid to measure the activity level in conventional seated office work, but they showed severe limitations for sit-stand desks. None of the placements was valid to detect the increased activity on the activity-promoting chair. Caution should therefore be paid when analysing the effect of workplace interventions on activity level with ActiGraph waist and wrist cut-points.

SUBMITTER: Kuster RP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7881682 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Concurrent and discriminant validity of ActiGraph waist and wrist cut-points to measure sedentary behaviour, activity level, and posture in office work.

Kuster Roman P RP Hagströmer Maria M Baumgartner Daniel D Grooten Wilhelmus J A WJA

BMC public health 20210212 1

<h4>Background</h4>Sedentary Behaviour (SB) gets an increasing attention from ergonomics and public health due to its associated detrimental health effects. A large number of studies record SB with ActiGraph counts-per-minute cut-points, but we still lack valid information about what the cut-points tell us about office work. This study therefore analysed the concurrent and discriminant validity of commonly used cut-points to measure SB, activity level, and posture.<h4>Methods</h4>Thirty office w ...[more]

PMID: 33579254

Similar Datasets

Project description:This study aimed to examine the validity and accuracy of wrist accelerometers for classifying sedentary behavior (SB) in children.Fifty-seven children (5-8 and 9-12 yr) completed an ~170-min protocol, including 15 semistructured activities and transitions. Nine ActiGraph (GT3X+) and two GENEActiv wrist cut points were evaluated. Direct observation was the criterion measure. The accuracy of wrist cut points was compared with that achieved by the ActiGraph hip cut point (?25 counts per 15 s) and the thigh-mounted activPAL3. Analyses included equivalence testing, Bland-Altman procedures, and area under the receiver operating curve (ROC-AUC).The most accurate ActiGraph wrist cut points (Kim; vector magnitude, ?3958 counts per 60 s; vertical axis, ?1756 counts per 60 s) demonstrated good classification accuracy (ROC-AUC = 0.85-0.86) and accurately estimated SB time in 5-8 yr (equivalence P = 0.02; mean bias = 4.1%, limits of agreement = -20.1% to 28.4%) and 9-12 yr (equivalence P < 0.01; -2.5%, -27.9% to 22.9%). The mean bias of SB time estimates from Kim were smaller than ActiGraph hip (5-8 yr: 15.8%, -5.7% to 37.2%; 9-12 yr: 17.8%, -3.9% to 39.5%) and similar to or smaller than activPAL3 (5-8 yr: 12.6%, -39.8% to 14.7%; 9-12 yr: -1.4%, -13.9% to 11.0%), although classification accuracy was similar to ActiGraph hip (ROC-AUC = 0.85) but lower than activPAL3 (ROC-AUC = 0.92-0.97). Mean bias (5-8 yr: 6.5%, -16.1% to 29.1%; 9-12 yr: 10.5%, -13.6% to 34.6%) for the most accurate GENEActiv wrist cut point (Schaefer: ?0.19 g) was smaller than ActiGraph hip, and activPAL3 in 5-8 yr, but larger than activPAL3 in 9-12 yr. However, SB time estimates from Schaefer were not equivalent to direct observation (equivalence P > 0.05) and classification accuracy (ROC-AUC = 0.79-0.80) was lower than for ActiGraph hip and activPAL3.The most accurate SB ActiGraph (Kim) and GENEActiv (Schaefer) wrist cut points can be applied in children with similar confidence as the ActiGraph hip cut point (?25 counts per 15 s), although activPAL3 was generally more accurate.

Project description:PurposeThis study aimed to examine the validity of wrist acceleration cut points for classifying moderate (MPA), vigorous (VPA), and moderate-to-vigorous (MVPA) physical activity.MethodsFifty-seven children (5-12 yr) completed 15 semistructured activities. Three sets of wrist cut points (>192 mg, >250 mg, and >314 mg), previously developed using Euclidian norm minus one (ENMO192+), GENEActiv software (GENEA250+), and band-pass filter followed by Euclidian norm (BFEN314+), were evaluated against indirect calorimetry. Analyses included classification accuracy, equivalence testing, and Bland-Altman procedures.ResultsAll cut points classified MPA, VPA, and MVPA with substantial accuracy (ENMO192+: κ = 0.72 [95% confidence interval = 0.72-0.73], MVPA: area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) = 0.85 [0.85-0.86]; GENEA250+: κ = 0.75 [0.74-0.76], MVPA: ROC-AUC = 0.85 [0.85-0.86]; BFEN314+: κ = 0.73 [0.72-0.74], MVPA: ROC-AUC = 0.86 [0.86-0.87]). BFEN314+ misclassified 19.7% non-MVPA epochs as MPA, whereas ENMO192+ and GENEA250+ misclassified 32.6% and 26.5% of MPA epochs as non-MVPA, respectively. Group estimates of MPA time were equivalent (P < 0.01) to indirect calorimetry for the BFEN314+ MPA cut point (mean bias = -1.5%, limits of agreement [LoA] = -57.5% to 60.6%), whereas estimates of MVPA time were equivalent (P < 0.01) to indirect calorimetry for the ENMO192+ (mean bias = -1.1%, LoA = -53.7% to 55.9%) and GENEA250+ (mean bias = 2.2%, LoA = -56.5% to 52.2%) cut points. Individual variability (LoA) was large for MPA (min: BFEN314+, -60.6% to 57.5%; max: GENEA250+, -42.0% to 104.1%), VPA (min: BFEN314+, -238.9% to 54.6%; max: ENMO192+, -244.5% to 127.4%), and MVPA (min: ENMO192+, -53.7% to 55.0%; max: BFEN314+, -83.9% to 25.3%).ConclusionWrist acceleration cut points misclassified a considerable proportion of non-MVPA and MVPA. Group-level estimates of MVPA were acceptable; however, error for individual-level prediction was larger.

Dataset Information

Concurrent and discriminant validity of ActiGraph waist and wrist cut-points to measure sedentary behaviour, activity level, and posture in office work.

Background

Methods

Results

Publications

Concurrent and discriminant validity of ActiGraph waist and wrist cut-points to measure sedentary behaviour, activity level, and posture in office work.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets