Validation of a Computerized 24-Hour Physical Activity Recall (24PAR) Instrument With Pattern-Recognition Activity Monitors

Calabró, Miguel A.; Welk, Gregory J.; Carriquiry, Alicia L.; Nusser, Sarah M.; Beyler, Nicholas; Mathews, Charles E

doi:10.1123/jpah.6.2.211

Cited by 36 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A unique aspect of the SenseWear Armband is that the proprietary algorithms applied by the software to estimate EE are continuously being improved by the manufacturer in an effort to reduce error. Several studies have demonstrated that the enhancements improve the accuracy of the assessment (Calabró, Welk, & Eisenmann, 2009;Calabro et al, 2009;Jakicic et al, 2004;Smith, Foster, & Campbell, 2011). Our research group has contributed to this work by collecting data needed to "train" the algorithms.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Validation of the SenseWear Armband in different ambient temperatures

Hoye

Boen

Lefevre

2014

Journal of Sports Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the validity of the SenseWear Armband in different temperatures using the old (SenseWear v2.2) and newest version of the algorithm (SenseWear v5.2) against indirect calorimetry (IC). Thirty-nine male and female students (21.1 ± 1.41 years) completed an exercise trial in 19°C, 26°C and 33°C consisting of 5 min standing followed by alternating walking/running at 35% and 65% of their maximal oxygen uptake. The accuracy of the algorithms was evaluated by comparing estimated energy expenditure (EE) to IC using a mixed-model design. No difference was reported in EE between the different temperatures for IC. Both algorithms estimated EE significantly higher when exercising at high intensity in 33°C compared to 19°C. Compared to IC, SenseWear v2.2 accurately estimated EE during standing and light intensity exercise but underestimated EE when exercising in a hot environment and at high intensity. SenseWear v5.2 showed a difference when exercising at high intensity in thermoneutral and warm conditions. The new algorithm improved EE estimation in hot environments and at high intensity compared to the old version. However, given the inherent inaccuracy of the EE estimates of SenseWear, greater weight should be given to direct monitor outputs rather than the ability of a monitor to estimate EE precisely.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Validation of the SenseWear Armband in different ambient temperatures

Hoye

Boen

Lefevre

2014

Journal of Sports Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The estimates of group-level EE were within 100 kcal of the estimates from the Sensewear (~ 5%–6% error) and these differences were not statistically or practically significant (effect sizes of < 0.20). A unique contribution of the study (7) is that we observed no differences in validity when used with or without a behavioral log designed to remind participants of their behavior. This suggests that participants can provide a reasonably accurate recall of their previous day’s activity using this type of interviewer-administered tool.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…While still prone to error, the time frame is short enough that participants are able to accurately recall duration of active and sedentary periods in a reasonably objective way (36). Previous work by our team evaluated the utility of an interviewer-administered 24-hour Physical Activity Recall (PAR) against temporally matched data from SenseWear Armband (SWA) monitors (7). We reported moderate to high correlations (r = 0.57) for reported levels of moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) and high correlations (r = 0.88) for estimates of energy expenditure (EE).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validity of 24-h Physical Activity Recall

Welk

Kim

Stanfill

et al. 2014

Medicine &Amp; Science in Sports &Amp; Exercise

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The primary purpose of this study was to evaluate the validity of an interviewer-administered, 24-hour physical activity recall (PAR) compared to the SenseWear Armband (SWA) for estimation of energy expenditure (EE) and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) in a representative sample of adults. A secondary goal was to compare measurement errors for various demographic sub-groups (gender, age and weight status). Methods A sample of 1347 adults (20–71yrs; 786 females) wore an SWA for a single day and then completed a PAR recalling that previous day’s physical activity. The participants each performed two trials on two randomly selected days across a 2 year time span. The EE and MVPA values for each participant were averaged across the two days. Group-level and individual-level agreement were evaluated using 95% equivalence testing and mean absolute percent error (MAPE), respectively. Results were further examined for sub-groups by gender, age and body mass index (BMI). Results The PAR yielded equivalent estimates of EE (compared to the SWA) for almost all demographic subgroups but none of the comparisons for MVPA were equivalent. Smaller MAPE values were observed for EE (ranges from 10.3% to 15.0%) than for MVPA (ranges from 68.6% to 269.5%), across all comparisons. The PAR yielded underestimates of MVPA for younger, less obese people but overestimates for older, more obese people. Conclusions For EE measurement, the PAR demonstrated good agreement relative to the SWA. However, the use of PAR may result in biased estimates of MVPA both at the group and individual level in adults.

show abstract

“…The PAR protocol was based on an established, facilitated recall methodology shown in previous studies to be effective for capturing details about the type and intensity of occupational, household and leisure-time PA (6, 19). Participants are asked to provide details about the type and intensity of PA performed in the day and the raw PA data are converted into estimates of EE using established metabolic equivalent (MET) codes from the Compendium of PA (1).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Context of Physical Activity in a Representative Sample of Adults

Welk

Kim

2015

Medicine &Amp; Science in Sports &Amp; Exercise

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The establishment of formal physical activity (PA) guidelines has led to considerable interest in quantifying participation in moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA). However, evidence on the context of MVPA at the population level is scarce. The purpose of this study was to provide types, location and purpose information of MVPA in a representative sample of adults. Methods Data from a representative sample of 1,234 Iowa adults were included in this study. Each participant performed a telephone-administered 24-hour PA recall method recalling the previous 24-hour’s physical activities. Self-reported data from the recall instrument included time and types of reported activities across 5 distinct location and purpose codes. Reported activities were matched with corresponding metabolic equivalent (MET) scores from a reduced list of PA Compendium. MVPA was defined as any activities with assigned METs ≥ 3.0. Results Of the top 30 most frequently reported MVPAs, 16 were lifestyle activities involving walking in the definition, and only 4 can be regarded as traditional “exercises”. Occupational activities (41% for purpose and 40% for location) and household activities (37% for purpose and 39% for location) accounted for nearly 80% of the total reported MVPA time. Time allocations across the purpose and location codes considerably differed by socio-demographic indicators. Conclusion Lifestyle activities were more frequently reported than sports and/or recreational activities. Individuals with varying levels of socio-demographic indicators exhibited different patterns of use-of-time within the given day. A multi-domain approach is needed to better understand and increase MVPA in diverse populations of US adults.

show abstract

Validation of a Computerized 24-Hour Physical Activity Recall (24PAR) Instrument With Pattern-Recognition Activity Monitors

Abstract: The results of this study support the overall utility of the 24PAR for group-level estimates of daily EE and MVPA.

Cited by 36 publications

References 18 publications

Validation of the SenseWear Armband in different ambient temperatures

Validation of the SenseWear Armband in different ambient temperatures

Validity of 24-h Physical Activity Recall

Context of Physical Activity in a Representative Sample of Adults

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About