z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Comparing the performance of three generations of ActiGraph accelerometers
Author(s) -
Megan Rothney,
Gregory Apker,
Yanna Song,
Kong Y. Chen
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
journal of applied physiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.253
H-Index - 229
eISSN - 8750-7587
pISSN - 1522-1601
DOI - 10.1152/japplphysiol.90641.2008
Subject(s) - accelerometer , sensitivity (control systems) , range (aeronautics) , statistics , mathematics , computer science , engineering , electronic engineering , aerospace engineering , operating system
ActiGraph accelerometers are a useful tool for objective assessment of physical activity in clinical and epidemiological studies. Several generations of ActiGraph are being used; however, little work has been done to verify that measurements are consistent across generations. This study employed mechanical oscillations to characterize the dynamic response and intermonitor variability of three generations of ActiGraph monitors, from the oldest 7164 (n = 13), 71256 (n = 12), to the newest GT1M (n = 12). The response due to independent radius (22.1-60.4 mm) and frequency (25-250 rpm) changes were measured, as well as intermonitor variability within each generation. The 7164 and 71256 have similar relationships between activity counts and radius (P = 0.229) but were significantly different from the GT1M (P < 0.001). The frequency responses were nonlinear in all three generations. Although the response curve shapes were similar, the differences between generations at various frequencies were significant (P < 0.017), especially in the extremes of the measurement range. Intermonitor variability was markedly reduced in the GT1M compared with the 7164 and 71256. Other measurement differences between generations include decreased peak counts and decreased sensitivity in low-frequency detection in the GT1M. The results of this study revealed an improvement of the intermonitor variability by the GT1M monitor. However, the reduced sensitivity in low-count ranges in the GT1M may not be well suited for monitoring sedentary or light-intensity movements. Furthermore, the algorithms for energy expenditure predictions developed using older 7164 monitors may need to be modified for the GT1M.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom