Validation of the SenseWear Mini activity monitor in 5−12-year-old children

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Christiana M.T. van Loo^a ; ^{cmtvl646@uowmail.edu.au} ; Anthony D. Okely^a ; Marijka J. Batterham^b ; Trina Hinkley^c ; Ulf Ekelund^d ; ^e ; Sø ; ren Brage^e ; John J. Reilly^f ; Gregory E. Peoples^g ; Rachel A. Jones^a ; Xanne Janssen^f ; Dylan P. Cliff^a
• 关键词：Energy expenditure ; Physical activity ; Accelerometry ; Calorimetry ; Validation study
• 刊名：Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport
• 出版年：2017
• 出版时间：January 2017
• 年：2017
• 卷：20
• 期：1
• 页码：55-59
• 全文大小：579 K
• 卷排序：20

文摘

This study aimed to validate SenseWear Mini software algorithm versions 2.2 (SW2.2) and 5.2 (SW5.2) for estimating energy expenditure (EE) in children.DesignLaboratory-based validation study.Methods57 children aged 5−12 y completed a protocol involving 15 semi-structured sedentary (SED), light-intensity (LPA), and moderate- to vigorous-intensity (MVPA) physical activities. EE was estimated using portable indirect calorimetry (IC). The accuracy of EE estimates (kcal·min−1) from SW2.2 and SW5.2 were examined at the group level and individual level using the mean absolute percentage error (MAPE), Bland-Altman plots and equivalence testing.ResultsMAPE values were lower for SW5.2 (30.1 ± 10.7%) than for SW2.2 (44.0 ± 6.2%). Although mean differences for SW5.2 were smaller than for SW2.2 during SED (−0.23 ± 0.22 vs. −0.61 ± 0.20 kcal·min−1), LPA (−0.69 ± 0.76 vs. −1.07 ± 0.46 kcal·min−1) and MVPA (−2.22 ± 1.15 vs. −2.57 ± 1.15 kcal·min−1), limits of agreement did not decrease for the updated algorithms. For all activities, SW2.2 and SW5.2 were not equivalent to IC (p > 0.05). Errors increased with increasing intensity.ConclusionThe current SenseWear Mini algorithms SW5.2 underestimated EE. The overall improved accuracy for SW5.2 was not accompanied with improved accuracy at the individual level and EE estimates were not equivalent to IC.