4.6 Review

Accelerometer Data Collection and Processing Criteria to Assess Physical Activity and Other Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Practical Considerations

Journal

SPORTS MEDICINE
Volume 47, Issue 9, Pages 1821-1845

Publisher

ADIS INT LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s40279-017-0716-0

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. umbrella of the ActiveBrains project [DEP2013-47540]
  2. Spanish Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport [FPU15/02645, FPU14/06837]
  3. Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness [BES-2014-068829]
  4. Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation [RYC-2011-09011, RYC-2010-05957]
  5. Research Council of Norway [249932/F20]
  6. UK Medical Research Council [MC_UU_12015/3]
  7. University of Granada, Plan Propio de Investigacion, Excellence actions: Units of Excellence
  8. Unit of Excellence on Exercise and Health (UCEES)
  9. SAMID III network, RETICS
  10. PN I + D+I (Spain), ISCIII-Sub-Directorate General for Research Assessment and Promotion
  11. European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) [RD16/0022]
  12. EXERNET Research Network on Exercise and Health in Special Populations [DEP2005-00046/ACTI]
  13. MRC [MC_UU_12015/3] Funding Source: UKRI
  14. Medical Research Council [MC_UU_12015/3] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Accelerometers are widely used to measure sedentary time, physical activity, physical activity energy expenditure (PAEE), and sleep-related behaviors, with the ActiGraph being the most frequently used brand by researchers. However, data collection and processing criteria have evolved in a myriad of ways out of the need to answer unique research questions; as a result there is no consensus. Objectives The purpose of this review was to: (1) compile and classify existing studies assessing sedentary time, physical activity, energy expenditure, or sleep using the ActiGraph GT3X/+ through data collection and processing criteria to improve data comparability and (2) review data collection and processing criteria when using GT3X/+ and provide age-specific practical considerations based on the validation/calibration studies identified. Methods Two independent researchers conducted the search in PubMed and Web of Science. We included all original studies in which the GT3X/+ was used in laboratory, controlled, or free-living conditions published from 1 January 2010 to the 31 December 2015. Results The present systematic review provides key information about the following data collection and processing criteria: placement, sampling frequency, filter, epoch length, non-wear-time, what constitutes a valid day and a valid week, cut-points for sedentary time and physical activity intensity classification, and algorithms to estimate PAEE and sleep-related behaviors. The information is organized by age group, since criteria are usually age-specific. Conclusion This review will help researchers and practitioners to make better decisions before (i.e., device placement and sampling frequency) and after (i.e., data processing criteria) data collection using the GT3X/? accelerometer, in order to obtain more valid and comparable data.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available