Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Sep;47(9):1821-1845.
doi: 10.1007/s40279-017-0716-0.

Accelerometer Data Collection and Processing Criteria to Assess Physical Activity and Other Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Practical Considerations

Jairo H Migueles  1 , Cristina Cadenas-Sanchez  2 , Ulf Ekelund  3   4 , Christine Delisle Nyström  5 , Jose Mora-Gonzalez  2 , Marie Löf  5   6 , Idoia Labayen  7 , Jonatan R Ruiz  2   5 , Francisco B Ortega  2   5
Affiliations

Accelerometer Data Collection and Processing Criteria to Assess Physical Activity and Other Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Practical Considerations

Jairo H Migueles et al. Sports Med. 2017 Sep.

Abstract

Background: Accelerometers are widely used to measure sedentary time, physical activity, physical activity energy expenditure (PAEE), and sleep-related behaviors, with the ActiGraph being the most frequently used brand by researchers. However, data collection and processing criteria have evolved in a myriad of ways out of the need to answer unique research questions; as a result there is no consensus.

Objectives: The purpose of this review was to: (1) compile and classify existing studies assessing sedentary time, physical activity, energy expenditure, or sleep using the ActiGraph GT3X/+ through data collection and processing criteria to improve data comparability and (2) review data collection and processing criteria when using GT3X/+ and provide age-specific practical considerations based on the validation/calibration studies identified.

Methods: Two independent researchers conducted the search in PubMed and Web of Science. We included all original studies in which the GT3X/+ was used in laboratory, controlled, or free-living conditions published from 1 January 2010 to the 31 December 2015.

Results: The present systematic review provides key information about the following data collection and processing criteria: placement, sampling frequency, filter, epoch length, non-wear-time, what constitutes a valid day and a valid week, cut-points for sedentary time and physical activity intensity classification, and algorithms to estimate PAEE and sleep-related behaviors. The information is organized by age group, since criteria are usually age-specific.

Conclusion: This review will help researchers and practitioners to make better decisions before (i.e., device placement and sampling frequency) and after (i.e., data processing criteria) data collection using the GT3X/+ accelerometer, in order to obtain more valid and comparable data.

Prospero registration number: CRD42016039991.

Keywords: Indirect Calorimetry; Multivariate Adaptive Regression Spline; Physical Activity Intensity; Sedentary Time; Vigorous Physical Activity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest Jairo H. Migueles, Cristina Cadenas-Sanchez, Ulf Ekelund, Christine Delisle Nyström, Jose Mora-Gonzalez, Marie Löf, Idoia Labayen, Jonatan R. Ruiz, and Francisco B. Ortega declare that they have no conflicts of interest relevant to the content of this review.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flowchart of the literature search and study selection process. 1Studies using accelerometers for other purposes (e.g., accelerometers attached to dogs). 2Studies that included two age ranges were counted in both age groups. 3Studies focused on validation, calibration or comparison of functions related to data collection or processing criteria. 4All cross-sectional, longitudinal, or intervention studies, which used the GT3X/+ device and met the inclusion criteria
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Percentage of the 235 included papers that did not report key methodological issues, separated by age group. NWT non-wear-time
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Warburton DER, Nicol CW, Bredin SSD. Health benefits of physical activity: the evidence. CMAJ. 2006;174:801–9. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fletcher G, Balady G, Blair S, et al. Statement on exercise: benefits and recommendations for physical activity programs for all Americans. Circulation. 1996;94:857–62. - PubMed
    1. Janssen I, Leblanc AG. Systematic review of the health benefits of physical activity and fitness in school-aged children and youth. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2010;7:40. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Warren JM, Ekelund U, Besson H, et al. Assessment of physical activity—a review of methodologies with reference to epidemiological research: a report of the exercise physiology section of the European Association of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil. 2010;17:127–39. - PubMed
    1. Bassett DR, Rowlands A, Trost SG. Calibration and validation of wearable monitors. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2012;44:32–8. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types