Capturing Free-living Physical Activity: Impacts Of Data Collection And Processing Decisions On Intensity Gradient

Device-based physical behavior measurement is important for surveillance and health research. Novel approaches to analyzing accelerometer data, like intensity gradient, capture the entire activity profile and may enhance comparability across studies and populations. However, it is unclear how data collection and processing decisions impact intensity gradient. PURPOSE: To assess if intensity gradient is affected by device type, location, and analytic decisions (epoch, metric, wear time algorithm). METHODS: Undergraduates (N=70) wore triaxial accelerometers for four waking days. All participants wore the same model at the hip and each wrist, and a subset (n=56) wore an accelerometer with a different dynamic range on one wrist. Mean Euclidean norm minus one (ENMO) and intensity gradient using ENMO were calculated for each wear location and device, three epoch lengths (1, 5, 60-s), and two wear time algorithms (counts, raw). Intensity gradient was also calculated for three other metrics (mean amplitude deviation, raw acceleration and count vector magnitude). Equivalence testing compared intensity gradient and mean ENMO (within 10% bounds) by location, device type, epoch length, wear time algorithm, and metric (intensity gradient only). RESULTS: Intensity gradient was equivalent (p<.05) across all wear locations, device types, wear time algorithms, and 1-s and 5-s epochs but not metrics (Table 1). ENMO was equivalent (p<.05) for device types, wear time algorithms, epochs, and wrists (Table 1). CONCLUSION: While intensity gradient and ENMO were invariant to device type, wear time algorithm, wrist location, and 1-s and 5-s epochs, only intensity gradient was equivalent between all wear locations, and only ENMO was equivalent across all epochs. Caution should be used when comparing across studies using different processing techniques. Future research should establish intensity gradient processing steps that improve comparability across epochs and metrics.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Published
2024-09-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0001056692.16762.f3
Primary Topic
Physical Activity and Health
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Capturing Free-living Physical Activity: Impacts Of Data Collection And Processing Decisions On Intensity Gradient

Karin A. Pfeiffer, Alexander H.K. Montoye, Rebecca E. Elwood, Kimberly A. Clevenger et al.
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Physical Activity and Health
article

Capturing Free-living Physical Activity: Impacts Of Data Collection And Processing Decisions On Intensity Gradient

Karin A. Pfeiffer, Alexander H.K. Montoye, Rebecca E. Elwood, Kimberly A. Clevenger, Katherine L. McKee
article en

Abstract

Device-based physical behavior measurement is important for surveillance and health research. Novel approaches to analyzing accelerometer data, like intensity gradient, capture the entire activity profile and may enhance comparability across studies and populations. However, it is unclear how data collection and processing decisions impact intensity gradient. PURPOSE: To assess if intensity gradient is affected by device type, location, and analytic decisions (epoch, metric, wear time algorithm). METHODS: Undergraduates (N=70) wore triaxial accelerometers for four waking days. All participants wore the same model at the hip and each wrist, and a subset (n=56) wore an accelerometer with a different dynamic range on one wrist. Mean Euclidean norm minus one (ENMO) and intensity gradient using ENMO were calculated for each wear location and device, three epoch lengths (1, 5, 60-s), and two wear time algorithms (counts, raw). Intensity gradient was also calculated for three other metrics (mean amplitude deviation, raw acceleration and count vector magnitude). Equivalence testing compared intensity gradient and mean ENMO (within 10% bounds) by location, device type, epoch length, wear time algorithm, and metric (intensity gradient only). RESULTS: Intensity gradient was equivalent (p<.05) across all wear locations, device types, wear time algorithms, and 1-s and 5-s epochs but not metrics (Table 1). ENMO was equivalent (p<.05) for device types, wear time algorithms, epochs, and wrists (Table 1). CONCLUSION: While intensity gradient and ENMO were invariant to device type, wear time algorithm, wrist location, and 1-s and 5-s epochs, only intensity gradient was equivalent between all wear locations, and only ENMO was equivalent across all epochs. Caution should be used when comparing across studies using different processing techniques. Future research should establish intensity gradient processing steps that improve comparability across epochs and metrics.

Medicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseVol. 56(10S)
Utah State University (US), Alma College (US), Michigan State University (US)
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 78%
Physical Activity and Health
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.