Comparison of three generations of ActiGraph™ activity monitors in children and adolescents

Abstract In this study, we evaluated agreement among three generations of ActiGraph™ accelerometers in children and adolescents. Twenty-nine participants (mean age = 14.2 ± 3.0 years) completed two laboratory-based activity sessions, each lasting 60 min. During each session, participants concurrently wore three different models of the ActiGraph™ accelerometers (GT1M, GT3X, GT3X+). Agreement among the three models for vertical axis counts, vector magnitude counts, and time spent in moderate-to-vigorous physical exercise (MVPA) was evaluated by calculating intraclass correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman plots. The intraclass correlation coefficient for total vertical axis counts, total vector magnitude counts, and estimated MVPA was 0.994 (95% CI = 0.989–0.996), 0.981 (95% CI = 0.969–0.989), and 0.996 (95% CI = 0.989–0.998), respectively. Inter-monitor differences for total vertical axis and vector magnitude counts ranged from 0.3% to 1.5%, while inter-monitor differences for estimated MVPA were equal to or close to zero. On the basis of these findings, we conclude that there is strong agreement between the GT1M, GT3X, and GT3X+ activity monitors, thus making it acceptable for researchers and practitioners to use different ActiGraph™ models within a given study.

[1]  D. Bassett,et al.  Comparison of four ActiGraph accelerometers during walking and running. , 2010, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[2]  Stewart G. Trost,et al.  State of the Art Reviews: Measurement of Physical Activity in Children and Adolescents , 2007 .

[3]  Stewart G Trost,et al.  Comparison of accelerometer cut points for predicting activity intensity in youth. , 2011, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[4]  J. Staudenmayer,et al.  Comparison of the ActiGraph 7164 and the ActiGraph GT1M during self-paced locomotion. , 2010, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[5]  J. Ziviani,et al.  Measurement of physical activity in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy: the way forward , 2013, Developmental medicine and child neurology.

[6]  Richard P Troiano,et al.  Large-scale applications of accelerometers: new frontiers and new questions. , 2007, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[7]  J M Bland,et al.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement , 1986 .

[8]  U. Ekelund,et al.  Comparison of two Actigraph models for assessing free-living physical activity in Indian adolescents , 2007, Journal of sports sciences.

[9]  R. Mcmurray,et al.  Calibration of two objective measures of physical activity for children , 2008, Journal of sports sciences.

[10]  D. G. Altman,et al.  REGRESSION ANALYSIS , 1986, The Lancet.

[11]  D. Bassett,et al.  The technology of accelerometry-based activity monitors: current and future. , 2005, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[12]  D. Altman,et al.  STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT , 1986, The Lancet.

[13]  Stewart G Trost,et al.  Conducting accelerometer-based activity assessments in field-based research. , 2005, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[14]  Kong Y Chen,et al.  Comparing the performance of three generations of ActiGraph accelerometers. , 2008, Journal of applied physiology.

[15]  Richard P Troiano,et al.  A timely meeting: objective measurement of physical activity. , 2005, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[16]  A. Rowlands The measurement of physical activity in children. , 1998 .

[17]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[18]  Dinesh John,et al.  Validation and comparison of ActiGraph activity monitors. , 2011, Journal of science and medicine in sport.