UA cloudflare authentication

 

A Comparison of Energy Expenditure Estimation of Several Physical Activity Monitors

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorDannecker, Kathryn L.
dc.contributor.authorSazonova, Nadezhda A.
dc.contributor.authorMelanson, Edward L.
dc.contributor.authorSazonov, Edward S.
dc.contributor.authorBrowning, Raymond C.
dc.contributor.otherColorado State University
dc.contributor.otherUniversity of Alabama Tuscaloosa
dc.contributor.otherUniversity of Colorado Denver
dc.date.accessioned2023-09-28T19:38:06Z
dc.date.available2023-09-28T19:38:06Z
dc.date.issued2013
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: Accurately and precisely estimating free-living energy expenditure (EE) is important for monitoring energy balance and quantifying physical activity. Recently, single and multisensor devices have been developed that can classify physical activities, potentially resulting in improved estimates of EE. Purpose: This study aimed to determine the validity of EE estimation of a footwear-based physical activity monitor and to compare this validity against a variety of research and consumer physical activity monitors. Methods: Nineteen healthy young adults (10 men, 9 women) completed a 4-h stay in a room calorimeter. Participants wore a footwear-based physical activity monitor as well as Actical, ActiGraph, IDEEA, DirectLife, and Fitbit devices. Each individual performed a series of postures/activities. We developed models to estimate EE from the footwear-based device, and we used the manufacturer's software to estimate EE for all other devices. Results: Estimated EE using the shoe-based device was not significantly different than measured EE (mean T SE; 476 T 20 vs 478 +/- 18 kcal, respectively) and had a root-mean-square error of 29.6 kcal (6.2%). The IDEEA and the DirectLlife estimates of EE were not significantly different than the measured EE, but the ActiGraph and the Fitbit devices significantly underestimated EE. Root-mean-square errors were 93.5 (19%), 62.1 kcal (14%), 88.2 kcal (18%), 136.6 kcal (27%), 130.1 kcal (26%), and 143.2 kcal (28%) for Actical, DirectLife, IDEEA, ActiGraph, and Fitbit, respectively. Conclusions: The shoe-based physical activity monitor provides a valid estimate of EE, whereas the other physical activity monitors tested have a wide range of validity when estimating EE. Our results also demonstrate that estimating EE based on classification of physical activities can be more accurate and precise than estimating EE based on total physical activity.en_US
dc.format.mediumelectronic
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.identifier.citationDANNECKER, K. L., SAZONOVA, N. A., MELANSON, E. L., SAZONOV, E. S., & BROWNING, R. C. (2013). A Comparison of Energy Expenditure Estimation of Several Physical Activity Monitors. In Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise (Vol. 45, Issue 11, pp. 2105–2112). Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). https://doi.org/10.1249/mss.0b013e318299d2eb
dc.identifier.doi10.1249/MSS.0b013e318299d2eb
dc.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-3382-7939
dc.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-7792-4234
dc.identifier.urihttps://ir.ua.edu/handle/123456789/11639
dc.languageEnglish
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherLippincott Williams & Wilkins
dc.subjectROOM CALORIMETER
dc.subjectOXYGEN CONSUMPTION
dc.subjectFREE-LIVING PHYSICAL ACTIVITY
dc.subjectSHOE-BASED PHYSICAL ACTIVITY MONITOR
dc.subjectACCELEROMETER
dc.subjectPREDICT
dc.subjectWALKING
dc.subjectHEALTH
dc.subjectCLASSIFICATION
dc.subjectEXERCISE
dc.subjectVALIDITY
dc.subjectOBESITY
dc.subjectHUMANS
dc.subjectYOUTH
dc.subjectSport Sciences
dc.titleA Comparison of Energy Expenditure Estimation of Several Physical Activity Monitorsen_US
dc.typeArticle
dc.typetext

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
10.1249MSS.0b013e318299d2eb.pdf
Size:
488.56 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download

Collections

Research and Publications - Department of Kinesiology