从老年人的臀部和大腿加速度计中得出的久坐行为指标的一致性:对研究身体和认知健康的影响

John Bellettiere, Fatima Tuz-Zahra, Jordan A Carlson, Nicola D Ridgers, Sandy Liles, Mikael Anne Greenwood-Hickman, Rod L Walker, Andrea Z LaCroix, Marta M Jankowska, Dori E Rosenberg, Loki Natarajan
{"title":"从老年人的臀部和大腿加速度计中得出的久坐行为指标的一致性:对研究身体和认知健康的影响","authors":"John Bellettiere,&nbsp;Fatima Tuz-Zahra,&nbsp;Jordan A Carlson,&nbsp;Nicola D Ridgers,&nbsp;Sandy Liles,&nbsp;Mikael Anne Greenwood-Hickman,&nbsp;Rod L Walker,&nbsp;Andrea Z LaCroix,&nbsp;Marta M Jankowska,&nbsp;Dori E Rosenberg,&nbsp;Loki Natarajan","doi":"10.1123/jmpb.2020-0036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Little is known about how sedentary behaviour (SB) metrics derived from hip-worn and thigh-worn accelerometers agree for older adults. Thigh-worn activPAL micro monitors were concurrently worn with hip-worn ActiGraph GT3X+ accelerometers (with SB measured using the 100 count-per-minute (cpm) cut-point; ActiGraph<sub>100cpm</sub>) by 953 older adults (age 77±6.6, 54% women) for 4-to-7 days. Device agreement for sedentary time and 5 SB pattern metrics was assessed using mean error and correlations. Logistic regression tested associations with 4 health outcomes using standardized (i.e., z-scores) and unstandardized SB metrics. Mean errors (activPAL-ActiGraph<sub>100cpm</sub>) and 95% limits of agreement were: sedentary time -54.7(-223.4,113.9) min/d; time in 30+ minute bouts 77.6(-74.8,230.1) min/d; mean bout duration 5.9(0.5,11.4) min; usual bout duration 15.2(0.4,30) min; breaks in sedentary time -35.4(-63.1,-7.6) breaks/d; and alpha -0.5(-0.6,-0.4). Respective Pearson correlations were: 0.66, 0.78, 0.73, 0.79, 0.51, 0.40. Concordance correlations were: 0.57, 0.67, 0.40, 0.50, 0.14, 0.02. The statistical significance and direction of associations was identical for ActiGraph<sub>100cpm</sub> and activPAL metrics in 46 of 48 tests, though significant differences in the magnitude of odds ratios were observed among 9 of 24 tests for unstandardized and 2 of 24 for standardized SB metrics. Caution is needed when interpreting SB metrics and associations with health from ActiGraph<sub>100cpm</sub> due to the tendency for it to overestimate breaks in sedentary time relative to activPAL. However, high correlations between activPAL and ActiGraph<sub>100cpm</sub> measures and similar standardized associations with health outcomes suggest that studies using ActiGraph<sub>100cpm</sub> are useful, though not ideal, for studying SB in older adults.</p>","PeriodicalId":73572,"journal":{"name":"Journal for the measurement of physical behaviour","volume":"4 1","pages":"79-88"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8547742/pdf/nihms-1686095.pdf","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Agreement of sedentary behaviour metrics derived from hip-worn and thigh-worn accelerometers among older adults: with implications for studying physical and cognitive health.\",\"authors\":\"John Bellettiere,&nbsp;Fatima Tuz-Zahra,&nbsp;Jordan A Carlson,&nbsp;Nicola D Ridgers,&nbsp;Sandy Liles,&nbsp;Mikael Anne Greenwood-Hickman,&nbsp;Rod L Walker,&nbsp;Andrea Z LaCroix,&nbsp;Marta M Jankowska,&nbsp;Dori E Rosenberg,&nbsp;Loki Natarajan\",\"doi\":\"10.1123/jmpb.2020-0036\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Little is known about how sedentary behaviour (SB) metrics derived from hip-worn and thigh-worn accelerometers agree for older adults. Thigh-worn activPAL micro monitors were concurrently worn with hip-worn ActiGraph GT3X+ accelerometers (with SB measured using the 100 count-per-minute (cpm) cut-point; ActiGraph<sub>100cpm</sub>) by 953 older adults (age 77±6.6, 54% women) for 4-to-7 days. Device agreement for sedentary time and 5 SB pattern metrics was assessed using mean error and correlations. Logistic regression tested associations with 4 health outcomes using standardized (i.e., z-scores) and unstandardized SB metrics. Mean errors (activPAL-ActiGraph<sub>100cpm</sub>) and 95% limits of agreement were: sedentary time -54.7(-223.4,113.9) min/d; time in 30+ minute bouts 77.6(-74.8,230.1) min/d; mean bout duration 5.9(0.5,11.4) min; usual bout duration 15.2(0.4,30) min; breaks in sedentary time -35.4(-63.1,-7.6) breaks/d; and alpha -0.5(-0.6,-0.4). Respective Pearson correlations were: 0.66, 0.78, 0.73, 0.79, 0.51, 0.40. Concordance correlations were: 0.57, 0.67, 0.40, 0.50, 0.14, 0.02. The statistical significance and direction of associations was identical for ActiGraph<sub>100cpm</sub> and activPAL metrics in 46 of 48 tests, though significant differences in the magnitude of odds ratios were observed among 9 of 24 tests for unstandardized and 2 of 24 for standardized SB metrics. Caution is needed when interpreting SB metrics and associations with health from ActiGraph<sub>100cpm</sub> due to the tendency for it to overestimate breaks in sedentary time relative to activPAL. However, high correlations between activPAL and ActiGraph<sub>100cpm</sub> measures and similar standardized associations with health outcomes suggest that studies using ActiGraph<sub>100cpm</sub> are useful, though not ideal, for studying SB in older adults.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73572,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal for the measurement of physical behaviour\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"79-88\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8547742/pdf/nihms-1686095.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal for the measurement of physical behaviour\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1123/jmpb.2020-0036\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for the measurement of physical behaviour","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/jmpb.2020-0036","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

对于老年人的久坐行为(SB)指标,从臀部和大腿上佩戴的加速度计中得出的结果是如何一致的,我们知之甚少。大腿佩戴的activPAL微型监测器与臀部佩戴的ActiGraph GT3X+加速度计同时佩戴(以每分钟100计数(cpm)的切割点测量SB;ActiGraph100cpm)对953名老年人(年龄77±6.6岁,54%为女性)进行4- 7天的观察。使用平均误差和相关性评估久坐时间和5个SB模式指标的设备一致性。使用标准化(即z分数)和非标准化SB指标,Logistic回归检验了与4种健康结局的关联。平均误差(activPAL-ActiGraph100cpm)和95%一致限为:久坐时间-54.7(-223.4,113.9)min/d;30分钟以上回合用时77.6(- 74.8230.1)min/d;平均发作时间5.9(0.5,11.4)min;通常发作时间15.2(0.4,30)分钟;久坐时间的休息-35.4(-63.1,-7.6)次/d;和-0.5(-0.6,-0.4)Pearson相关系数分别为:0.66、0.78、0.73、0.79、0.51、0.40。一致性相关分别为:0.57、0.67、0.40、0.50、0.14、0.02。48项测试中的46项中,ActiGraph100cpm和activPAL指标的统计学意义和关联方向是相同的,尽管在24项非标准化测试中的9项和24项标准化SB指标中的2项中,比值比的大小存在显著差异。当从ActiGraph100cpm中解释SB指标和与健康的关联时,需要谨慎,因为相对于activPAL,它倾向于高估久坐时间的休息时间。然而,activPAL和ActiGraph100cpm测量之间的高度相关性以及与健康结果的类似标准化关联表明,使用ActiGraph100cpm的研究对于研究老年人的SB是有用的,尽管不是理想的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Agreement of sedentary behaviour metrics derived from hip-worn and thigh-worn accelerometers among older adults: with implications for studying physical and cognitive health.

Little is known about how sedentary behaviour (SB) metrics derived from hip-worn and thigh-worn accelerometers agree for older adults. Thigh-worn activPAL micro monitors were concurrently worn with hip-worn ActiGraph GT3X+ accelerometers (with SB measured using the 100 count-per-minute (cpm) cut-point; ActiGraph100cpm) by 953 older adults (age 77±6.6, 54% women) for 4-to-7 days. Device agreement for sedentary time and 5 SB pattern metrics was assessed using mean error and correlations. Logistic regression tested associations with 4 health outcomes using standardized (i.e., z-scores) and unstandardized SB metrics. Mean errors (activPAL-ActiGraph100cpm) and 95% limits of agreement were: sedentary time -54.7(-223.4,113.9) min/d; time in 30+ minute bouts 77.6(-74.8,230.1) min/d; mean bout duration 5.9(0.5,11.4) min; usual bout duration 15.2(0.4,30) min; breaks in sedentary time -35.4(-63.1,-7.6) breaks/d; and alpha -0.5(-0.6,-0.4). Respective Pearson correlations were: 0.66, 0.78, 0.73, 0.79, 0.51, 0.40. Concordance correlations were: 0.57, 0.67, 0.40, 0.50, 0.14, 0.02. The statistical significance and direction of associations was identical for ActiGraph100cpm and activPAL metrics in 46 of 48 tests, though significant differences in the magnitude of odds ratios were observed among 9 of 24 tests for unstandardized and 2 of 24 for standardized SB metrics. Caution is needed when interpreting SB metrics and associations with health from ActiGraph100cpm due to the tendency for it to overestimate breaks in sedentary time relative to activPAL. However, high correlations between activPAL and ActiGraph100cpm measures and similar standardized associations with health outcomes suggest that studies using ActiGraph100cpm are useful, though not ideal, for studying SB in older adults.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Influence of Accelerometer Calibration on the Estimation of Objectively Measured Physical Activity: The Tromsø Study Criterion Validity of Accelerometers in Determining Knee-Flexion Angles During Sitting in a Laboratory Setting Comparability of 24-hr Activity Cycle Outputs From ActiGraph Counts Generated in ActiLife and RStudio Comparison of Sleep and Physical Activity Metrics From Wrist-Worn ActiGraph wGT3X-BT and GT9X Accelerometers During Free-Living in Adults Pre- Versus Postmeal Sedentary Duration—Impact on Postprandial Glucose in Older Adults With Overweight or Obesity
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1