Suppr超能文献

比较和验证加速度计佩戴时间和非佩戴时间算法,以评估儿童和青少年的身体活动水平。

Comparison and validation of accelerometer wear time and non-wear time algorithms for assessing physical activity levels in children and adolescents.

机构信息

University of Lille, Inserm, CHU Lille, U995 - LIRIC - Lille Inflammation Research International Center, CIC 1403 - Centre d'investigation clinique, Avenue Eugène Avinée, 59037 Lille Cedex, F-59000, Lille, France.

University of Lille, CHU Lille, EA 2694 - Public Health: epidemiology and quality of care, F-59000, Lille, France.

出版信息

BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019 Apr 2;19(1):72. doi: 10.1186/s12874-019-0712-1.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Accelerometers are widely used to measure sedentary time and daily physical activity (PA). However, data collection and processing criteria, such as non-wear time rules might affect the assessment of total PA and sedentary time and the associations with health variables. The study aimed to investigate whether the choice of different non-wear time definitions would affect the outcomes of PA levels in youth.

METHODS

Seventy-seven healthy youngsters (44 boys), aged 10-17 years, wore an accelerometer and kept a non-wear log diary during 4 consecutives days. We compared 7 published algorithms (10, 15, 20, 30, 60 min of continuous zeros, Choi, and Troiano algorithms). Agreements of each algorithm with the log diary method were assessed using Bland-Altmans plots and by calculating the concordance correlation coefficient for repeated measures.

RESULTS

Variations in time spent in sedentary and moderate to vigorous PA (MVPA) were 30 and 3.7%. Compared with the log diary method, greater discrepancies were found for the algorithm 10 min (p < 0.001). For the time assessed in sedentary, the agreement with diary was excellent for the 4 algorithms (Choi, r = 0.79; Troiano, r = 0.81; 30 min, r = 0.79; 60 min, r = 0.81). Concordance for each method was excellent for the assessment of time spent in MVPA (> 0.86). The agreement for the wear time assessment was excellent for 5 algorithms (Choi r = 0.79; Troiano r = 0.79; 20 min r = 0.77; 30 min r = 0.80; 60 min r = 0.80).

CONCLUSIONS

The choice of non-wear time rules may considerably affect the sedentary time assessment in youth. Using of appropriate data reduction decision in youth is needed to limit differences in associations between health outcomes and sedentary behaviors and may improve comparability for future studies. Based on our results, we recommend the use of the algorithm of 30 min of continuous zeros for defining non-wear time to improve the accuracy in assessing PA levels in youth.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02844101 (retrospectively registered at July 13th 2016).

摘要

背景

加速度计被广泛用于测量久坐时间和日常体力活动(PA)。然而,数据采集和处理标准,如非佩戴时间规则,可能会影响总 PA 和久坐时间的评估,以及与健康变量的关联。本研究旨在探讨不同非佩戴时间定义的选择是否会影响青少年 PA 水平的结果。

方法

77 名健康青少年(44 名男孩),年龄 10-17 岁,连续 4 天佩戴加速度计并记录非佩戴日志。我们比较了 7 种已发表的算法(连续零 10、15、20、30、60 分钟,Choi 和 Troiano 算法)。使用 Bland-Altman 图和重复测量的一致性相关系数评估每种算法与日志法的一致性。

结果

久坐和中高强度体力活动(MVPA)时间的变化分别为 30%和 3.7%。与日志法相比,算法 10 分钟的差异更大(p<0.001)。对于评估的久坐时间,与日志的一致性对于 4 种算法均为优秀(Choi,r=0.79;Troiano,r=0.81;30 分钟,r=0.79;60 分钟,r=0.81)。每种方法的一致性对于评估 MVPA 时间均为优秀(>0.86)。对于佩戴时间评估的协议对于 5 种算法均为优秀(Choi r=0.79;Troiano r=0.79;20 分钟 r=0.77;30 分钟 r=0.80;60 分钟 r=0.80)。

结论

非佩戴时间规则的选择可能会极大地影响青少年的久坐时间评估。在青少年中使用适当的数据减少决策是必要的,以限制健康结果和久坐行为之间关联的差异,并可能提高未来研究的可比性。基于我们的结果,我们建议使用 30 分钟连续零的算法来定义非佩戴时间,以提高青少年 PA 水平评估的准确性。

试验注册

NCT02844101(2016 年 7 月 13 日回顾性注册)。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验