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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Concurrent validation of the Actigraph gt3x+, Polar Active accelerometer, Omron HJ-720 and Yamax Digiwalker SW-701 pedometer step counts in lab-based and free-living settings.
    Author: Lee JA, Williams SM, Brown DD, Laurson KR.
    Journal: J Sports Sci; 2015; 33(10):991-1000. PubMed ID: 25517396.
    Abstract:
    Activity monitors are frequently used to assess activity in many settings. But as technology advances, so do the mechanisms used to estimate activity causing a continuous need to validate newly developed monitors. The purpose of this study was to examine the step count validity of the Yamax Digiwalker SW-701 pedometer (YX), Omron HJ-720 T pedometer (OP), Polar Active accelerometer (PAC) and Actigraph gt3x+ accelerometer (AG) under controlled and free-living conditions. Participants completed five stages of treadmill walking (n = 43) and a subset of these completed a 3-day free-living wear period (n = 37). Manually counted (MC) steps provided a criterion measure for treadmill walking, whereas the comparative measure during free-living was the YX. During treadmill walking, the OP was the most accurate monitor across all speeds (±1.1% of MC steps), while the PAC underestimated steps by 6.7-16.0% per stage. During free-living, the OP and AG counted 97.5% and 98.5% of YX steps, respectively. The PAC overestimated steps by 44.0%, or 5,265 steps per day. The Omron pedometer seems to provide the most reliable and valid estimate of steps taken, as it was the best performer under lab-based conditions and provided comparable results to the YX in free-living. Future studies should consider these monitors in additional populations and settings.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]