Accelerometry Data in Health Research: Challenges and Opportunities

Karas, Marta; Bai, Jiawei; Strączkiewicz, Marcin; Harezlak, Jaroslaw; Glynn, Nancy W.; Harris, Tamara B.; Zipunnikov, Vadim; Crainiceanu, Ciprian M.; Urbanek, Jacek

doi:10.1007/s12561-018-9227-2

Cited by 84 publications

(74 citation statements)

References 78 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Barnett et al [ 44 ] further analysed their results using manual methods within Excel, while Nilsen et al [ 53 ] used Kinesoft software. While the use of accelerometry for PA measurement is clearly popular for collection of PA data with children, and considered the “gold standard”, more recent research has now begun to suggest the use of the raw acceleration output from accelerometers to classify activity and intensity [ 103 , 104 , 105 , 106 , 107 ], in addition to the use of machine learning [ 108 ]. These approaches are considered to be more reliable and valid methods, yet researchers may face a number of practical challenges, including having to learn a complex analysis process [ 109 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fundamental Movement Skills and Accelerometer-Measured Physical Activity Levels during Early Childhood: A Systematic Review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Early childhood is a key period for children to begin developing and practicing fundamental movement skills (FMS), while aiming to perform sufficient physical activity (PA). This study reviews the current evidence for the levels of achievement in FMS and PA measured using accelerometers among 4–5-year-old children and examines differences by gender. This review was conducted using the PRISMA framework. Keyword searches were conducted in Pubmed, Medline, Google Scholar and SPORTDiscus. Inclusion criteria included age: 4–5 years old; FMS measurement: Test of Gross Motor Development 2 and 3; PA measurement: objective methods; balance measurement: static single limb; study design: cross-sectional observational/descriptive, randomised control trials, intervention studies; language: English. Twenty-eight articles from twenty-one countries met the inclusion criteria and were split into either FMS and PA articles (n = 10) or balance articles (n = 18). Three articles showed children achieving 60 min of moderate to vigorous PA per day, two articles demonstrated significant differences between girls’ and boys’ performance of locomotor skills and five reported locomotor skills to be more proficient than object control skills at this age for both genders. Balance was measured in time (n = 12), points score (n = 3) or biomechanical variables (n = 3), displaying heterogeneity of not only measurement but also outcomes within these data, with static single limb balance held between 6.67 to 87.6 s within the articles. Four articles reported girls to have better balance than boys. There is little conclusive evidence of the current levels for FMS, PA and balance achievement in young children 4–5 years of age. The academic literature consistently reports low levels of FMS competence and mixed evidence for PA levels. Inconsistencies lie in balance measurement methodology, with broad-ranging outcomes of both low and high achievement at 4–5 years old. Further research is required to focus on increasing practice opportunities for children to improve their FMS, increase PA levels and establish sufficient balance ability. Consistent and comparable outcomes during early childhood through more homogenous methodologies are warranted.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fundamental Movement Skills and Accelerometer-Measured Physical Activity Levels during Early Childhood: A Systematic Review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Actigraphs are typically worn on the wrist of the user's non‐dominant hand to minimize movement‐related artefacts. A low‐pass bandwidth filter in the 2‐10 Hz range is used to filter out unwanted signal noise due to ambient vibration and other artefacts outside the normal range of movement in humans; a correction is also applied to account for the static acceleration force of gravity 44,45 …”

Section: Actigraphymentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring circadian function in bipolar disorders: Empirical and conceptual review of physiological, actigraphic, and self‐report approaches

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Interest in biological clock pathways in bipolar disorders (BD) continues to grow, but there has yet to be an audit of circadian measurement tools for use in BD research and practice. Procedure The International Society for Bipolar Disorders Chronobiology Task Force conducted a critical integrative review of circadian methods that have real‐world applicability. Consensus discussion led to the selection of three domains to review—melatonin assessment, actigraphy, and self‐report. Results Measurement approaches used to quantify circadian function in BD are described in sufficient detail for researchers and clinicians to make pragmatic decisions about their use. A novel integration of the measurement literature is offered in the form of a provisional taxonomy distinguishing between circadian measures (the instruments and methods used to quantify circadian function, such as dim light melatonin onset) and circadian constructs (the biobehavioral processes to be measured, such as circadian phase). Conclusions Circadian variables are an important target of measurement in clinical practice and biomarker research. To improve reproducibility and clinical application of circadian constructs, an informed systematic approach to measurement is required. We trust that this review will decrease ambiguity in the literature and support theory‐based consideration of measurement options.

show abstract

“…In this scenario, sample-level data are never accessible to the manufacturer or any user, as it is never written to memory. However, as memory capacity exponentially increases, it has become more common to collect and store raw high-frequency data, 41 albeit with a trade-off against battery life.…”

Section: Data Rights and Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Fit‐for‐Purpose Biometric Monitoring Technologies: Leveraging the Laboratory Biomarker Experience

Godfrey

Vandendriessche

Bakker

et al. 2020

Clinical Translational Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biometric monitoring technologies (BioMeTs) are becoming increasingly common to aid data collection in clinical trials and practice. The state of BioMeTs, and associated digitally measured biomarkers, is highly reminiscent of the field of laboratory biomarkers 2 decades ago. In this review, we have summarized and leveraged historical perspectives, and lessons learned from laboratory biomarkers as they apply to BioMeTs. Both categories share common features, including goals and roles in biomedical research, definitions, and many elements of the biomarker qualification framework. They can also be classified based on the underlying technology, each with distinct features and performance characteristics, which require bench and human experimentation testing phases. In contrast to laboratory biomarkers, digitally measured biomarkers require prospective data collection for purposes of analytical validation in human subjects, lack well-established and widely accepted performance characteristics, require human factor testing, and, for many applications, access to raw (sample-level) data. Novel methods to handle large volumes of data, as well as security and data rights requirements add to the complexity of this emerging field. Our review highlights the need for a common framework with appropriate vocabulary and standardized approaches to evaluate digitally measured biomarkers, including defining performance characteristics and acceptance criteria. Additionally, the need for human factor testing drives early patient engagement during technology development. Finally, use of BioMeTs requires a relatively high degree of technology literacy among both study participants and healthcare professionals. Transparency of data generation and the need for novel analytical and statistical tools creates opportunities for precompetitive collaborations. Measure what is measurable and make measurable what is not so. Galileo Galilei (1564-1642).

show abstract

Accelerometry Data in Health Research: Challenges and Opportunities

Cited by 84 publications

References 78 publications

Fundamental Movement Skills and Accelerometer-Measured Physical Activity Levels during Early Childhood: A Systematic Review

Fundamental Movement Skills and Accelerometer-Measured Physical Activity Levels during Early Childhood: A Systematic Review

Measuring circadian function in bipolar disorders: Empirical and conceptual review of physiological, actigraphic, and self‐report approaches

Fit‐for‐Purpose Biometric Monitoring Technologies: Leveraging the Laboratory Biomarker Experience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About