Technical reliability assessment of three accelerometer models in a mechanical setup

被引:193
作者
Esliger, Dale W.
Tremblay, Mark S.
机构
[1] Univ Saskatchewan, Coll Kinesiol, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B2, Canada
[2] STAT Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada
关键词
physical activity; activity monitor; measurement; acceleration; frequency; validity; CSA ACTIVITY MONITOR; PHYSICAL-ACTIVITY; COMPUTER-SCIENCE; CHILDREN; FUTURE;
D O I
10.1249/01.mss.0000239394.55461.08
中图分类号
G8 [体育];
学科分类号
04 ; 0403 ;
摘要
Purpose: To determine which of the three most commonly used accelerometer models has the best intra- and interinstrument reliability using a mechanical laboratory setup. Secondly, to determine the effects that acceleration and frequency have on these reliability measures. Methods: Three experiments were performed. In the first, five each of the Actical, Actigraph, and RT3 accelerometers were placed on a hydraulic shaker plate and simultaneously accelerated in the vertical plane at varying accelerations and frequencies. Six different conditions of varying intensity were used to produce a range of accelerometer counts. Reliability was calculated using standard deviation, standard error of the measurement, coefficient of variation, and intraclass correlation coefficients. In the second and third experiments, 39 Actical and 50 Actigraph accelerometers were put through the same six conditions. Results: Experiment 1 showed poor reliability in the RT3 (intra- and interinstrument CV > 40%). Experiments 2 and 3 clearly indicated that the Actical (CVintra = 0.5%, CVinter = 5.4%) was more reliable than the Actigraph (CVintra = 3.2%, CVinter = 8.6%). Variability in the Actical was negatively related to the acceleration of the condition, whereas no relationship was found between acceleration and reliability in the Actigraph. Variability in the Actigraph was negatively related to the frequency of the condition, whereas no relationship was found between frequency and reliability in the Actical. Conclusion: Of the three accelerometer models measured in this study, the Actical had the best intra- and interinstrument reliability. However, discrepant trends in the variability of Actical and Actigraph counts across accelerations and frequencies preclude the selection of a superior model. More work is needed to understand why accelerometers designed to measure the same thing behave so differently.
引用
收藏
页码:2173 / 2181
页数:9
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]  
Brage S., 2003, Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, V7, P101, DOI [DOI 10.1207/S15327841, DOI 10.1207/S15327841MPEE0702_]
[2]  
CASPERSEN CJ, 1989, EXERCISE SPORT SCI R, V17, P423
[3]   The technology of accelerometry-based activity monitors: Current and future [J].
Chen, KY ;
Bassett, DR .
MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2005, 37 (11) :S490-S500
[4]  
Esliger D.W., 2005, J PHYS ACTIVITY HLTH, V3, P366, DOI DOI 10.1123/JPAH.2.3.366
[5]   Using the computer science and applications (CSA) activity monitor in preschool children [J].
Fairweather, SC ;
Reilly, JJ ;
Grant, S ;
Whittaker, A ;
Paton, JY .
PEDIATRIC EXERCISE SCIENCE, 1999, 11 (04) :413-420
[6]   Technical reliability of the CSA activity monitor: The EarlyBird Study [J].
Metcalf, BS ;
Curnow, JSH ;
Evans, C ;
Voss, LD ;
Wilkin, TJ .
MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2002, 34 (09) :1533-1537
[7]  
National Center for Health Statistics, NAT HLTH NUTR EX SUR
[8]   Technical variability of the RT3 accelerometer [J].
Powell, SM ;
Jones, DI ;
Rowlands, AV .
MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2003, 35 (10) :1773-1778
[9]  
Puyau MR, 2004, MED SCI SPORT EXER, V36, P1625, DOI 10.1249/01.MSS.0000139898.30804.60
[10]   Validation of the RT3 triaxial accelerometer for the assessment of physical activity [J].
Rowlands, AV ;
Thomas, PWM ;
Eston, RG ;
Topping, R .
MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2004, 36 (03) :518-524