These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

116 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10912900)

  • 1. Comparisons of four methods of estimating physical activity in adult women.
    Leenders NYJM ; Sherman WM; Nagaraja HN
    Med Sci Sports Exerc; 2000 Jul; 32(7):1320-6. PubMed ID: 10912900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluation of methods to assess physical activity in free-living conditions.
    Leenders NY; Sherman WM; Nagaraja HN; Kien CL
    Med Sci Sports Exerc; 2001 Jul; 33(7):1233-40. PubMed ID: 11445774
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Validation of the telephone and in-person interview versions of the 7-day PAR.
    Hayden-Wade HA; Coleman KJ; Sallis JF; Armstrong C
    Med Sci Sports Exerc; 2003 May; 35(5):801-9. PubMed ID: 12750590
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Validity of accelerometry for the assessment of moderate intensity physical activity in the field.
    Hendelman D; Miller K; Baggett C; Debold E; Freedson P
    Med Sci Sports Exerc; 2000 Sep; 32(9 Suppl):S442-9. PubMed ID: 10993413
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Physical activity-related energy expenditure with the RT3 and TriTrac accelerometers in overweight adults.
    Jacobi D; Perrin AE; Grosman N; Doré MF; Normand S; Oppert JM; Simon C
    Obesity (Silver Spring); 2007 Apr; 15(4):950-6. PubMed ID: 17426330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of the TriTrac-R3D accelerometer and a self-report activity diary with heart-rate monitoring for the assessment of energy expenditure in children.
    Rodriguez G; Béghin L; Michaud L; Moreno LA; Turck D; Gottrand F
    Br J Nutr; 2002 Jun; 87(6):623-31. PubMed ID: 12067433
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparison of methods to estimate physical activity and energy expenditure in African American children.
    Ramírez-Marrero FA; Smith BA; Sherman WM; Kirby TE
    Int J Sports Med; 2005 Jun; 26(5):363-71. PubMed ID: 15895319
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Field trial of a three-dimensional activity monitor: comparison with self report.
    Matthews CE; Freedson PS
    Med Sci Sports Exerc; 1995 Jul; 27(7):1071-8. PubMed ID: 7564975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparison of accelerometer and pedometer measures of physical activity in boys and girls, ages 8-10 years.
    Rowlands AV; Eston RG
    Res Q Exerc Sport; 2005 Sep; 76(3):251-7. PubMed ID: 16270702
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Ability of different physical activity monitors to detect movement during treadmill walking.
    Leenders NY; Nelson TE; Sherman WM
    Int J Sports Med; 2003 Jan; 24(1):43-50. PubMed ID: 12582951
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Validity, reliability, and calibration of the Tritrac accelerometer as a measure of physical activity.
    Nichols JF; Morgan CG; Sarkin JA; Sallis JF; Calfas KJ
    Med Sci Sports Exerc; 1999 Jun; 31(6):908-12. PubMed ID: 10378921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The accuracy of the TriTrac-R3D accelerometer to estimate energy expenditure.
    Jakicic JM; Winters C; Lagally K; Ho J; Robertson RJ; Wing RR
    Med Sci Sports Exerc; 1999 May; 31(5):747-54. PubMed ID: 10331898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparison of pedometer and accelerometer measures of free-living physical activity.
    Tudor-Locke C; Ainsworth BE; Thompson RW; Matthews CE
    Med Sci Sports Exerc; 2002 Dec; 34(12):2045-51. PubMed ID: 12471314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Field evaluation of energy expenditure in women using Tritrac accelerometers.
    Campbell KL; Crocker PR; McKenzie DC
    Med Sci Sports Exerc; 2002 Oct; 34(10):1667-74. PubMed ID: 12370570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of three methods for measuring the time spent in physical activity.
    Ainsworth BE; Bassett DR; Strath SJ; Swartz AM; O'Brien WL; Thompson RW; Jones DA; Macera CA; Kimsey CD
    Med Sci Sports Exerc; 2000 Sep; 32(9 Suppl):S457-64. PubMed ID: 10993415
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A comparative evaluation of three accelerometry-based physical activity monitors.
    Welk GJ; Blair SN; Wood K; Jones S; Thompson RW
    Med Sci Sports Exerc; 2000 Sep; 32(9 Suppl):S489-97. PubMed ID: 10993419
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of a computerized physical activity recall with a triaxial motion sensor in middle-school youth.
    McMurray RG; Harrell JS; Bradley CB; Webb JP; Goodman EM
    Med Sci Sports Exerc; 1998 Aug; 30(8):1238-45. PubMed ID: 9710863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Using three objective criteria to examine pedometer guidelines for free-living individuals.
    Macfarlane DJ; Chan D; Chan KL; Ho EY; Lee CC
    Eur J Appl Physiol; 2008 Oct; 104(3):435-44. PubMed ID: 18560880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of activity monitors to estimate energy cost of treadmill exercise.
    King GA; Torres N; Potter C; Brooks TJ; Coleman KJ
    Med Sci Sports Exerc; 2004 Jul; 36(7):1244-51. PubMed ID: 15235333
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Estimating physical activity using the CSA accelerometer and a physical activity log.
    Schmidt MD; Freedson PS; Chasan-Taber L
    Med Sci Sports Exerc; 2003 Sep; 35(9):1605-11. PubMed ID: 12972884
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.