RMIT University
Browse

Counting steps in research: A comparison of accelerometery and pedometry

journal contribution
posted on 2024-11-02, 03:35 authored by Melody Oliver, Hannah BadlandHannah Badland, Janine Shepherd, Grant Schofield
The objective of this study was to assess the validity of the step count functions in Actical accelerometers and activPAL inclinometers, compared with pedome-ter-derived step count data. Firstly, directly observed step counts over 3 treadmill speeds were compared with steps collected from 3 pedometers, accelerometers, and inclinometers in 10 adults. Secondly, step count data were derived from 22 participants who wore a pedome-ter, accelerometer, and inclinometer over 48 hours. Agreement between measurement tools was determined. All monitors appropriately measured steps in the labo-ratory conditions. In free living conditions, the mean percentage differences with pedometer-determined step counts were -7.3% and 7.0% for the Actical and ac-tivPAL monitors, respectively. With the exception of slow walking for the Actical units (ICC < 0.001), acceptable reliability was found within units for all treadmill speeds, and across units during the free living condition. The 95% prediction interval ranges were wide, ranging from -68.8% to 54.2% for the Acticals, and from -39.1% to 53.2% for the activPALs. Step counts gathered from Actical and activPAL units should not be used interchangeably with pedometer-derived step count data.

History

Journal

Open Journal of Preventive Medicine

Volume

1

Number

5055

Issue

1

Start page

1

End page

7

Total pages

7

Publisher

Scientific Research Publishing

Place published

United States

Language

English

Copyright

© 2011 SciRes

Former Identifier

2006072260

Esploro creation date

2020-06-22

Fedora creation date

2017-05-22

Usage metrics

    Scholarly Works

    Categories

    Keywords

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC