Comparison of older and newer generations of ActiGraph accelerometers with the normal filter and the low frequency extension

Kelli L. Cain, Terry L. Conway, Marc Adams, Lisa E. Husak, James F. Sallis

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    61 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Background: Many studies used the older ActiGraph (7164) for physical activity measurement, but this model has been replaced with newer ones (e.g., GT3X+). The assumption that new generation models are more accurate has been questioned, especially for measuring lower intensity levels. The low-frequency extension (LFE) increases the low-intensity sensitivity of newer models, but its comparability with older models is unknown. This study compared step counts and physical activity collected with the 7164 and GT3X + using the Normal Filter and the LFE (GT3X+N and GT3X+LFE, respectively).Findings: Twenty-five adults wore 2 accelerometer models simultaneously for 3Âdays and were instructed to engage in typical behaviors. Average daily step counts and minutes per day in nonwear, sedentary, light, moderate, and vigorous activity were calculated. Repeated measures ANOVAs with post-hoc pairwise comparisons were used to compare mean values. Means for the GT3X+N and 7164 were significantly different in 4 of the 6 categories (p < .05). The GT3X+N showed 2041 fewer steps per day and more sedentary, less light, and less moderate than the 7164 (+25.6, -31.2, -2.9 mins/day, respectively). The GT3X+LFE showed non-significant differences in 5 of 6 categories but recorded significantly more steps (+3597 steps/day; p < .001) than the 7164.Conclusion: Studies using the newer ActiGraphs should employ the LFE for greater sensitivity to lower intensity activity and more comparable activity results with studies using the older models. Newer generation ActiGraphs do not produce comparable step counts to the older generation devices with the Normal filter or the LFE.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Article number51
    JournalInternational Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
    Volume10
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Apr 25 2013

    Fingerprint

    Light
    Analysis of Variance
    Equipment and Supplies

    Keywords

    • Data processing
    • GT3X
    • Measurement
    • Methods
    • Physical activity
    • Sedentary
    • Step counts

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Medicine (miscellaneous)
    • Nutrition and Dietetics
    • Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

    Cite this

    Comparison of older and newer generations of ActiGraph accelerometers with the normal filter and the low frequency extension. / Cain, Kelli L.; Conway, Terry L.; Adams, Marc; Husak, Lisa E.; Sallis, James F.

    In: International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, Vol. 10, 51, 25.04.2013.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    @article{4af4cec682e7439da3c01aea84a12872,
    title = "Comparison of older and newer generations of ActiGraph accelerometers with the normal filter and the low frequency extension",
    abstract = "Background: Many studies used the older ActiGraph (7164) for physical activity measurement, but this model has been replaced with newer ones (e.g., GT3X+). The assumption that new generation models are more accurate has been questioned, especially for measuring lower intensity levels. The low-frequency extension (LFE) increases the low-intensity sensitivity of newer models, but its comparability with older models is unknown. This study compared step counts and physical activity collected with the 7164 and GT3X + using the Normal Filter and the LFE (GT3X+N and GT3X+LFE, respectively).Findings: Twenty-five adults wore 2 accelerometer models simultaneously for 3{\^A}days and were instructed to engage in typical behaviors. Average daily step counts and minutes per day in nonwear, sedentary, light, moderate, and vigorous activity were calculated. Repeated measures ANOVAs with post-hoc pairwise comparisons were used to compare mean values. Means for the GT3X+N and 7164 were significantly different in 4 of the 6 categories (p{\^a}€‰<{\^a}€‰.05). The GT3X+N showed 2041 fewer steps per day and more sedentary, less light, and less moderate than the 7164 (+25.6, -31.2, -2.9 mins/day, respectively). The GT3X+LFE showed non-significant differences in 5 of 6 categories but recorded significantly more steps (+3597 steps/day; p{\^a}€‰<{\^a}€‰.001) than the 7164.Conclusion: Studies using the newer ActiGraphs should employ the LFE for greater sensitivity to lower intensity activity and more comparable activity results with studies using the older models. Newer generation ActiGraphs do not produce comparable step counts to the older generation devices with the Normal filter or the LFE.",
    keywords = "Data processing, GT3X, Measurement, Methods, Physical activity, Sedentary, Step counts",
    author = "Cain, {Kelli L.} and Conway, {Terry L.} and Marc Adams and Husak, {Lisa E.} and Sallis, {James F.}",
    year = "2013",
    month = "4",
    day = "25",
    doi = "10.1186/1479-5868-10-51",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "10",
    journal = "International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity",
    issn = "1479-5868",
    publisher = "BioMed Central",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Comparison of older and newer generations of ActiGraph accelerometers with the normal filter and the low frequency extension

    AU - Cain, Kelli L.

    AU - Conway, Terry L.

    AU - Adams, Marc

    AU - Husak, Lisa E.

    AU - Sallis, James F.

    PY - 2013/4/25

    Y1 - 2013/4/25

    N2 - Background: Many studies used the older ActiGraph (7164) for physical activity measurement, but this model has been replaced with newer ones (e.g., GT3X+). The assumption that new generation models are more accurate has been questioned, especially for measuring lower intensity levels. The low-frequency extension (LFE) increases the low-intensity sensitivity of newer models, but its comparability with older models is unknown. This study compared step counts and physical activity collected with the 7164 and GT3X + using the Normal Filter and the LFE (GT3X+N and GT3X+LFE, respectively).Findings: Twenty-five adults wore 2 accelerometer models simultaneously for 3Âdays and were instructed to engage in typical behaviors. Average daily step counts and minutes per day in nonwear, sedentary, light, moderate, and vigorous activity were calculated. Repeated measures ANOVAs with post-hoc pairwise comparisons were used to compare mean values. Means for the GT3X+N and 7164 were significantly different in 4 of the 6 categories (p < .05). The GT3X+N showed 2041 fewer steps per day and more sedentary, less light, and less moderate than the 7164 (+25.6, -31.2, -2.9 mins/day, respectively). The GT3X+LFE showed non-significant differences in 5 of 6 categories but recorded significantly more steps (+3597 steps/day; p < .001) than the 7164.Conclusion: Studies using the newer ActiGraphs should employ the LFE for greater sensitivity to lower intensity activity and more comparable activity results with studies using the older models. Newer generation ActiGraphs do not produce comparable step counts to the older generation devices with the Normal filter or the LFE.

    AB - Background: Many studies used the older ActiGraph (7164) for physical activity measurement, but this model has been replaced with newer ones (e.g., GT3X+). The assumption that new generation models are more accurate has been questioned, especially for measuring lower intensity levels. The low-frequency extension (LFE) increases the low-intensity sensitivity of newer models, but its comparability with older models is unknown. This study compared step counts and physical activity collected with the 7164 and GT3X + using the Normal Filter and the LFE (GT3X+N and GT3X+LFE, respectively).Findings: Twenty-five adults wore 2 accelerometer models simultaneously for 3Âdays and were instructed to engage in typical behaviors. Average daily step counts and minutes per day in nonwear, sedentary, light, moderate, and vigorous activity were calculated. Repeated measures ANOVAs with post-hoc pairwise comparisons were used to compare mean values. Means for the GT3X+N and 7164 were significantly different in 4 of the 6 categories (p < .05). The GT3X+N showed 2041 fewer steps per day and more sedentary, less light, and less moderate than the 7164 (+25.6, -31.2, -2.9 mins/day, respectively). The GT3X+LFE showed non-significant differences in 5 of 6 categories but recorded significantly more steps (+3597 steps/day; p < .001) than the 7164.Conclusion: Studies using the newer ActiGraphs should employ the LFE for greater sensitivity to lower intensity activity and more comparable activity results with studies using the older models. Newer generation ActiGraphs do not produce comparable step counts to the older generation devices with the Normal filter or the LFE.

    KW - Data processing

    KW - GT3X

    KW - Measurement

    KW - Methods

    KW - Physical activity

    KW - Sedentary

    KW - Step counts

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84876955292&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84876955292&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1186/1479-5868-10-51

    DO - 10.1186/1479-5868-10-51

    M3 - Article

    C2 - 23618461

    AN - SCOPUS:84876955292

    VL - 10

    JO - International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

    JF - International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

    SN - 1479-5868

    M1 - 51

    ER -