Comparison of Accelerometry-Based Measures of Physical Activity: Retrospective Observational Data Analysis Study.
MIMS
accelerometry
actigraphy
activity counts
aging
digital health
health monitoring
health technology
monitor-independent movement summary
older adult population
physical activity
wearable computing
wearable device
wearable technology
Journal
JMIR mHealth and uHealth
ISSN: 2291-5222
Titre abrégé: JMIR Mhealth Uhealth
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101624439
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
22 07 2022
22 07 2022
Historique:
received:
17
03
2022
accepted:
10
05
2022
revised:
04
05
2022
entrez:
22
7
2022
pubmed:
23
7
2022
medline:
27
7
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Given the evolution of processing and analysis methods for accelerometry data over the past decade, it is important to understand how newer summary measures of physical activity compare with established measures. We aimed to compare objective measures of physical activity to increase the generalizability and translation of findings of studies that use accelerometry-based data. High-resolution accelerometry data from the Baltimore Longitudinal Study on Aging were retrospectively analyzed. Data from 655 participants who used a wrist-worn ActiGraph GT9X device continuously for a week were summarized at the minute level as ActiGraph activity count, monitor-independent movement summary, Euclidean norm minus one, mean amplitude deviation, and activity intensity. We calculated these measures using open-source packages in R. Pearson correlations between activity count and each measure were quantified both marginally and conditionally on age, sex, and BMI. Each measures pair was harmonized using nonparametric regression of minute-level data. Data were from a sample (N=655; male: n=298, 45.5%; female: n=357, 54.5%) with a mean age of 69.8 years (SD 14.2) and mean BMI of 27.3 kg/m2 (SD 5.0). The mean marginal participant-specific correlations between activity count and monitor-independent movement summary, Euclidean norm minus one, mean amplitude deviation, and activity were r=0.988 (SE 0.0002324), r=0.867 (SE 0.001841), r=0.913 (SE 0.00132), and r=0.970 (SE 0.0006868), respectively. After harmonization, mean absolute percentage errors of predicting total activity count from monitor-independent movement summary, Euclidean norm minus one, mean amplitude deviation, and activity intensity were 2.5, 14.3, 11.3, and 6.3, respectively. The accuracies for predicting sedentary minutes for an activity count cut-off of 1853 using monitor-independent movement summary, Euclidean norm minus one, mean amplitude deviation, and activity intensity were 0.981, 0.928, 0.904, and 0.960, respectively. An R software package called SummarizedActigraphy, with a unified interface for computation of the measures from raw accelerometry data, was developed and published. The findings from this comparison of accelerometry-based measures of physical activity can be used by researchers and facilitate the extension of knowledge from existing literature by demonstrating the high correlation between activity count and monitor-independent movement summary (and other measures) and by providing harmonization mapping.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Given the evolution of processing and analysis methods for accelerometry data over the past decade, it is important to understand how newer summary measures of physical activity compare with established measures.
OBJECTIVE
We aimed to compare objective measures of physical activity to increase the generalizability and translation of findings of studies that use accelerometry-based data.
METHODS
High-resolution accelerometry data from the Baltimore Longitudinal Study on Aging were retrospectively analyzed. Data from 655 participants who used a wrist-worn ActiGraph GT9X device continuously for a week were summarized at the minute level as ActiGraph activity count, monitor-independent movement summary, Euclidean norm minus one, mean amplitude deviation, and activity intensity. We calculated these measures using open-source packages in R. Pearson correlations between activity count and each measure were quantified both marginally and conditionally on age, sex, and BMI. Each measures pair was harmonized using nonparametric regression of minute-level data.
RESULTS
Data were from a sample (N=655; male: n=298, 45.5%; female: n=357, 54.5%) with a mean age of 69.8 years (SD 14.2) and mean BMI of 27.3 kg/m2 (SD 5.0). The mean marginal participant-specific correlations between activity count and monitor-independent movement summary, Euclidean norm minus one, mean amplitude deviation, and activity were r=0.988 (SE 0.0002324), r=0.867 (SE 0.001841), r=0.913 (SE 0.00132), and r=0.970 (SE 0.0006868), respectively. After harmonization, mean absolute percentage errors of predicting total activity count from monitor-independent movement summary, Euclidean norm minus one, mean amplitude deviation, and activity intensity were 2.5, 14.3, 11.3, and 6.3, respectively. The accuracies for predicting sedentary minutes for an activity count cut-off of 1853 using monitor-independent movement summary, Euclidean norm minus one, mean amplitude deviation, and activity intensity were 0.981, 0.928, 0.904, and 0.960, respectively. An R software package called SummarizedActigraphy, with a unified interface for computation of the measures from raw accelerometry data, was developed and published.
CONCLUSIONS
The findings from this comparison of accelerometry-based measures of physical activity can be used by researchers and facilitate the extension of knowledge from existing literature by demonstrating the high correlation between activity count and monitor-independent movement summary (and other measures) and by providing harmonization mapping.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35867392
pii: v10i7e38077
doi: 10.2196/38077
pmc: PMC9356340
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Observational Study
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e38077Subventions
Organisme : NIA NIH HHS
ID : R01 AG075883
Pays : United States
Organisme : NINDS NIH HHS
ID : R01 NS060910
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIA NIH HHS
ID : U01 AG057545
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
©Marta Karas, John Muschelli, Andrew Leroux, Jacek K Urbanek, Amal A Wanigatunga, Jiawei Bai, Ciprian M Crainiceanu, Jennifer A Schrack. Originally published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth (https://mhealth.jmir.org), 22.07.2022.
Références
J Intern Med. 2020 Apr;287(4):373-394
pubmed: 32107805
Biostatistics. 2014 Jan;15(1):102-16
pubmed: 23999141
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2013 Apr 25;10:51
pubmed: 23618461
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2021 Jul 13;76(8):1504-1511
pubmed: 33230557
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2021 Jul 13;76(8):1486-1494
pubmed: 33000171
Br J Sports Med. 2014 Jul;48(13):1019-23
pubmed: 24782483
Sci Rep. 2022 Jul 13;12(1):11958
pubmed: 35831446
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011 Feb;43(2):357-64
pubmed: 20581716
Stat Biosci. 2019 Jul;11(2):210-237
pubmed: 31762829
PLoS One. 2017 Feb 1;12(2):e0169649
pubmed: 28146576
J Meas Phys Behav. 2019 Dec;2(4):268-281
pubmed: 34308270
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2014 Aug;69(8):973-9
pubmed: 24336819
Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2015 Jan;35(1):64-70
pubmed: 24393233
PLoS One. 2013 Apr 23;8(4):e61691
pubmed: 23626718
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2016 Aug;48(8):1514-1522
pubmed: 27031744
J Sports Sci. 2020 Nov;38(22):2569-2578
pubmed: 32677510