Carrying loads: Validating a portable tri-axial accelerometer during frequent and brief physical activity

Zorrilla‐Revilla, Guillermo; Cachorro, Ana Mateos; Prado‐Nóvoa, Olalla; Vidal‐Cordasco, Marco; Rodrı́guez, Jesús

doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2017.01.236

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Regarding its accuracy for the measurement of REE, in the study of Malavolti et al on healthy subjects, Bland-Altman plot showed no difference in REE determination between SWA (version 4.0) and IC [17], and authors judged the SWA as a reliable device for measuring REE in healthy subjects. In line with these findings, in the study of Zorrilla-Revilla et al, the SWA (version 7.0) estimates of RMR in healthy adults were associated with small error scores (mean absolute percentage error � 17.31%; mean difference � 11.1%) [14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 52%

“…Similarly, Casiraghi et al obtained a high Pearson's correlation (R � 0.95) when testing the accuracy of SWA (software 6.1) for measuring REE in healthy normal-weight individuals [47]. In addition, Zorrilla-Revilla et al found small mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) and percentage mean change in healthy adults, when measuring RMR using the SWA mini (software 7.0) [14].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Moreover, it has been demonstrated that the error of accelerometers' estimates is affected by the activity type and intensity (being higher in the case of vigorous activities and sedentary behaviors) and by differences in body weight, with increasing BMI being associated with increased bias [45,46]. Furthermore, some accelerometers, such as SWA, require the insertion of subjects' characteristics (gender, sex, and smoking status) in the equations, including anthropometric parameters, whose measurement itself can represent a source of bias, especially for the estimation of REE [14].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the reliability of SWA for the measurement of both REE and EE during physical exercises or in free-living conditions has been demonstrated in different studies considering normal-weight healthy individuals, its applicability remains controversial [14][15][16][17][18][19][20]. Under free-living conditions, SWA (software versions 6.1 and 7.0) demonstrated a good agreement with DLW in the Bland-Altman plot and high values of intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) (>0.80) in healthy subjects [16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Validity of Accelerometers for the Evaluation of Energy Expenditure in Obese and Overweight Individuals: A Systematic Review

Pisanu

Deledda

Loviselli

et al. 2020

Journal of Nutrition and Metabolism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. Even though the validity of accelerometers for the measurement of energy expenditure (EE) has been demonstrated for normal-weight individuals, the applicability of this instrument in obese individuals remains controversial. This review aims to summarize the level of agreement between accelerometers and the gold standards (indirect calorimetry and doubly labelled water) for the measurement of energy expenditure (EE) in obese or overweight individuals. Methods. The literature search was limited to comparison studies assessing agreement in EE determination between accelerometers and indirect calorimetry (IC) or doubly labelled water (DLW). We searched in PubMed and in Scopus until March 1, 2019. The analysis was restricted to obese or overweight adult individuals. The following descriptive information was extracted for each study: sample size, characteristics of participants (sex, age, BMI, fat mass percentage, any pathological conditions, modality of recruitment in the study, and exclusion criteria), accelerometer description (model, type and body position), and type of gold standard and validity protocol (duration, conditions, and requirements during and before the experiment). Three review authors independently screened the obtained results, and the quality of the selected articles was assessed by the QUADAS-2 tool. Results. We obtained seventeen eligible articles, thirteen of which showed concerns for the applicability section, due to the patient selection. Regarding the accelerometers, nine devices were validated in the included studies with the BodyMedia SenseWear® (SWA) being the most frequently validated. Although correlations between accelerometers and the gold standard were high in some studies, agreement between the two methods was low, as shown by the Bland–Altman plots. Conclusions. Most accelerometer estimations of EE were inaccurate for obese/overweight subjects, and authors advise to improve the accuracy of algorithms for SWA software, or the predicted equations for estimating EE from other accelerometers.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 52%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Validity of Accelerometers for the Evaluation of Energy Expenditure in Obese and Overweight Individuals: A Systematic Review

Pisanu

Deledda

Loviselli

et al. 2020

Journal of Nutrition and Metabolism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For this last purpose, DLW is likely the best method, but its high costs often prevent its use (Ndahimana & Kim, 2017). In contrast, accelerometry is a cheap and easy-to-use alternative allowing 24-hour measurements with a noninvasive procedure and without interfering on the subjects' daily lives (Smith, Lanningham-Foster, Welk, & Campbell, 2012;van Hees et al, 2011), although there are reasons to consider the results obtained thus with caution (Zorrilla-Revilla, Mateos, Prado-Nóvoa, Vidal-Cordasco, & Rodríguez, 2017). For instance, a recent study (Abeysekera et al, 2016) found a significant increase in total EE (TEE) on a sample of 26 females, measured longitudinally from the first to the last trimester of gestation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Body composition helps: Differences in energy expenditure between pregnant and nonpregnant females

Prado‐Nóvoa

Rodrı́guez

García

et al. 2020

American J Hum Biol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Human pregnancy is associated with important physiological changes that usually increase energetic requirements. However, great variability exists in the costs and mechanisms required to bear pregnancy. Since body mass (BM) and composition are modified during gestation, it is of great interest to compare the influence of BM on energy expenditure (EE) in pregnant and nonpregnant females.Methods: BM, body composition, and EE of 77 volunteers (35 pregnant and 42 nonpregnant females) were measured. The pregnant volunteers completed two measurement rounds at 28 and 32 gestation weeks. Differences on the measured parameters were sought, and comparison of regression lines was computed to test how BM affected the EE of the volunteers.Results: BM and body composition parameters are significantly higher in pregnant females, but EE is not statistically different. Pregnant females have a larger percentage of fat mass, but lower percentage of fat-free mass (FFM). The EE per kg of FFM is similar in both groups. Comparison of regression lines shows that pregnancy does not change the relationship between BM and EE, but for similar BM pregnant females expend less energy than nonpregnant females. Conclusions: We propose that their larger percentage of passive body tissues is the reason why pregnant females expend less energy than nonpregnant females of similar BM, without changing the scaling of EE on BM. Thus, pregnancy could not be as energetically constraining as usually assumed, with important consequences for human reproductive ecology.

show abstract

Real-time activity monitoring with a wristband and a smartphone

Cvetković

Szeklicki²,

Janko

et al. 2018

Information Fusion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Carrying loads: Validating a portable tri-axial accelerometer during frequent and brief physical activity

Cited by 4 publications

References 27 publications

Validity of Accelerometers for the Evaluation of Energy Expenditure in Obese and Overweight Individuals: A Systematic Review

Validity of Accelerometers for the Evaluation of Energy Expenditure in Obese and Overweight Individuals: A Systematic Review

Body composition helps: Differences in energy expenditure between pregnant and nonpregnant females

Real-time activity monitoring with a wristband and a smartphone

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About