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: Impact of ActiGraph sampling rate on free-living physical activity measurement in youth.
    Author: Clevenger KA, Brønd JC, Mackintosh KA, Pfeiffer KA, Montoye AHK, McNarry MA.
    Journal: Physiol Meas; 2022 Oct 10; 43(10):. PubMed ID: 36137538.
    Abstract:
    ActiGraph sampling frequencies of more than 30 Hz may result in overestimation of activity counts in both children and adults, but research on free-living individuals has not included the range of sampling frequencies used by researchers.Objective.We compared count- and raw-acceleration-based metrics from free-living children and adolescents across a range of sampling frequencies.Approach.Participants (n = 445; 10-15 years of age) wore an ActiGraph accelerometer for at least one 10 h day. Vector magnitude counts, mean amplitude deviation, monitor-independent movement summary units, and activity intensity classified using six methods (four cut-points, two-regression model, and artificial neural network) were compared between 30 Hz and 60, 80, 90, and 100 Hz sampling frequencies using mean absolute differences, correlations, and equivalence testing.Main results.All outcomes were statistically equivalent, and correlation coefficients were ≥0.970. Absolute differences were largest for the 30 versus 80 and 30 versus 100 Hz count comparisons. For comparisons of 30 with 60, 80, 90, or 100 Hz, mean (and maximum) absolute differences in minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity per day ranged from 0.1 to 0.3 (0.4 to 1.5), 0.3 to 1.3 (1.6 to 8.6), 0.1 to 0.3 (1.1 to 2.5), and 0.3 to 2.5 (1.6 to 14.3) across the six classification methods.Significance.Acceleration-based outcomes are comparable across the full range of sampling rates and therefore recommended for future research. If using counts, we recommend a multiple of 30 Hz because using a 100 Hz sampling rate resulted in large maximum individual differences and epoch-level differences, and increasing differences with activity level.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]