2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2020.04.014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Bout Cadence Method Improves the Quantification of Stepping Cadence In Free-Living Conditions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We have demonstrated that adults engage in an average of 18 min/day at stepping cadences between 120 and 140 step/min (i.e., proxy of VPA) and 3 min/day at cadences > 140 step/min. 21 Given the challenges of implementing 30 min/day VPA (or 210 min/week), it should be acknowledged that even 10 min/day (or 70 min/week) was associated with a predicted 3–4 ml·kg −1 ·min −1 higher aerobic fitness (i.e., ∼1 MET). Importantly, VPA is attainable for most populations with heuristic stepping cadence recommendations of VPA being equal to ∼130 step/min, 12 which is within the upper threshold for walking cadences (< 140 step/min).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We have demonstrated that adults engage in an average of 18 min/day at stepping cadences between 120 and 140 step/min (i.e., proxy of VPA) and 3 min/day at cadences > 140 step/min. 21 Given the challenges of implementing 30 min/day VPA (or 210 min/week), it should be acknowledged that even 10 min/day (or 70 min/week) was associated with a predicted 3–4 ml·kg −1 ·min −1 higher aerobic fitness (i.e., ∼1 MET). Importantly, VPA is attainable for most populations with heuristic stepping cadence recommendations of VPA being equal to ∼130 step/min, 12 which is within the upper threshold for walking cadences (< 140 step/min).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… 13 , 17 , 20 The method of using stepping cadence to derive physical activity intensity is described in more detail elsewhere. 21 …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Because of naturally occurring fluctuations in stepping speeds while walking (eg, walking in the home, crowded places, traffic lights), an accurate estimate of bout length by intensity could not be determined. However, the approach of examining each walking bout individually, considering intrabout changes by presenting the percentage of moderate and light walking per bout (as done in this study), has recently been substantiated as more accurate 56 than previously used approaches that estimate walking intensity per bout by calculating the average per time interval. 38 The differences between included and not-included participants in this study indicate a propensity among the not-included participants of having higher age and living alone.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…The interobserver reliability of this program to analyze sedentary time ( R = 0.94, P < 0.001; mean error = 9 ± 58 min·d −1 , absolute mean error = 19 ± 56 min·d −1 ) and sedentary breaks ( R = 0.99, P < 0.001; mean error = 0.03 ± 0.19 breaks per hour, absolute mean error = 0.08 ± 0.20 breaks per hour) was determined by comparing outcomes between two investigators who each blindly analyzed 21 participants (120 total d). Additionally, the time spent within LPA, MPA, and VPA step rate thresholds was determined in a separate customized LabVIEW program, as described in more detail elsewhere (13).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%