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.
229 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21424979)
21. Evaluating the Responsiveness of Accelerometry to Detect Change in Physical Activity. Montoye AH; Pfeiffer KA; Suton D; Trost SG Meas Phys Educ Exerc Sci; 2014 Jan; 18(4):273-285. PubMed ID: 25284973 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Calibration and comparison of accelerometer cut points in preschool children. van Cauwenberghe E; Labarque V; Trost SG; de Bourdeaudhuij I; Cardon G Int J Pediatr Obes; 2011 Jun; 6(2-2):e582-9. PubMed ID: 21121867 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Calibration and Cross-Validation of the ActiGraph wGT3X+ Accelerometer for the Estimation of Physical Activity Intensity in Children with Intellectual Disabilities. McGarty AM; Penpraze V; Melville CA PLoS One; 2016; 11(10):e0164928. PubMed ID: 27760219 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Accelerometry cut points for physical activity in underserved African Americans. Trumpeter NN; Lawman HG; Wilson DK; Pate RR; Van Horn ML; Tate AK Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act; 2012 Jun; 9():73. PubMed ID: 22697280 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Intensity classification accuracy of accelerometer-measured physical activities in Chinese children and youth. Zhu Z; Chen P; Zhuang J Res Q Exerc Sport; 2013 Dec; 84 Suppl 2():S4-11. PubMed ID: 24527562 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Discrepancies between methods of identifying objectively determined physical activity. Ham SA; Reis JP; Strath SJ; Dubose KD; Ainsworth BE Med Sci Sports Exerc; 2007 Jan; 39(1):52-8. PubMed ID: 17218884 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Assessing the validity and reliability and determining cut-points of the Actiwatch 2 in measuring physical activity. Kemp C; Pienaar PR; Henst RHP; Roden LC; Kolbe-Alexander TL; Rae DE Physiol Meas; 2020 Sep; 41(8):085001. PubMed ID: 32886650 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Evaluation of Actical equations and thresholds to predict physical activity intensity in young children. Janssen X; Cliff D; Reilly J; Hinkley T; Jones R; Batterham M; Ekelund U; Brage S; Okely T J Sports Sci; 2015; 33(5):498-506. PubMed ID: 25259944 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Calibration of an accelerometer during free-living activities in children. Mattocks C; Leary S; Ness A; Deere K; Saunders J; Tilling K; Kirkby J; Blair SN; Riddoch C Int J Pediatr Obes; 2007; 2(4):218-26. PubMed ID: 17852552 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Estimating cut points: A simple method for new wearables. Hickey A; Newham J; Slawinska MM; Kwasnicka D; McDonald S; Del Din S; Sniehotta FF; Davis PA; Godfrey A Maturitas; 2016 Jan; 83():78-82. PubMed ID: 26490294 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Defining accelerometer cut-points for different intensity levels in motor-complete spinal cord injury. Holmlund T; Ekblom-Bak E; Franzén E; Hultling C; Wahman K Spinal Cord; 2020 Jan; 58(1):116-124. PubMed ID: 31243318 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Ankle Accelerometry for Assessing Physical Activity Among Adolescent Girls: Threshold Determination, Validity, Reliability, and Feasibility. Hager ER; Treuth MS; Gormely C; Epps L; Snitker S; Black MM Res Q Exerc Sport; 2015; 86(4):397-405. PubMed ID: 26288333 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Individualized Accelerometer Activity Cut-Points for the Measurement of Relative Physical Activity Intensity Levels. Gil-Rey E; Maldonado-Martín S; Gorostiaga EM Res Q Exerc Sport; 2019 Sep; 90(3):327-335. PubMed ID: 31058588 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. The effect of reintegrating Actigraph accelerometer counts in preschool children: comparison using different epoch lengths. Kim Y; Beets MW; Pate RR; Blair SN J Sci Med Sport; 2013 Mar; 16(2):129-34. PubMed ID: 22749940 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Accelerometer cut-points derived during over-ground walking in persons with mild, moderate, and severe multiple sclerosis. Sandroff BM; Riskin BJ; Agiovlasitis S; Motl RW J Neurol Sci; 2014 May; 340(1-2):50-7. PubMed ID: 24635890 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. National youth sedentary behavior and physical activity daily patterns using latent class analysis applied to accelerometry. Evenson KR; Wen F; Hales D; Herring AH Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act; 2016 May; 13():55. PubMed ID: 27142304 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Determining activity count cut-points for measurement of physical activity using the Actiwatch2 accelerometer. Neil-Sztramko SE; Rafn BS; Gotay CC; Campbell KL Physiol Behav; 2017 May; 173():95-100. PubMed ID: 28108333 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Modifying Accelerometer Cut-Points Affects Criterion Validity in Simulated Free-Living for Adolescents and Adults. Hibbing PR; Bassett DR; Crouter SE Res Q Exerc Sport; 2020 Sep; 91(3):514-524. PubMed ID: 32023183 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. Performance of the ActiGraph accelerometer using a national population-based sample of youth and adults. Evenson KR; Wen F BMC Res Notes; 2015 Jan; 8():7. PubMed ID: 25595702 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]