Concurrent validity of the PAM accelerometer relative to the MTI Actigraph using oxygen consumption as a reference

Slootmaker, S. M., Chin A. Paw, M. J. M., Schuit, A. J., Van Mechelen, W. and Koppes, L. L. J. (2009) Concurrent validity of the PAM accelerometer relative to the MTI Actigraph using oxygen consumption as a reference. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, 19 1: 36-43. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0838.2007.00740.x


Author Slootmaker, S. M.
Chin A. Paw, M. J. M.
Schuit, A. J.
Van Mechelen, W.
Koppes, L. L. J.
Title Concurrent validity of the PAM accelerometer relative to the MTI Actigraph using oxygen consumption as a reference
Journal name Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 0905-7188
1600-0838
Publication date 2009-02-01
Year available 2008
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2007.00740.x
Volume 19
Issue 1
Start page 36
End page 43
Total pages 8
Editor Michael Kjaer
Place of publication Malden, MA, United States
Publisher Wiley-Blackwell
Language eng
Subject 11 Medical and Health Sciences
1106 Human Movement and Sports Science
Formatted abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the concurrent validity of the Personal Activity Monitor (PAM) accelerometer relative to the Actigraph accelerometer using oxygen consumption as a reference, and to assess the test–retest reliability of the PAM. Thirty-two fit, normal weight adults (aged 21–54) performed two activities, treadmill walking and stair walking, while wearing the PAM, the Actigraph and the Cosmed K4b2. Correlation coefficients and agreement in absolute energy expenditure (EE) levels between PAM, Actigraph and Cosmed were calculated. The test–retest reliability was examined among 296 PAM's using a laboratory shaker. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and coefficient of variation (CV) were determined. Correlations for treadmill walking and stair walking, respectively, were r2=0.95 and r2=0.65 for PAM with Actigraph, r2=0.82 and r2=0.93 for PAM with VO2 and r2=0.64 and 0.74 for Actigraph with VO2. Both the PAM and Actigraph underestimated EE during treadmill and stair walking by a substantial amount. The test–retest reliability of the PAM was high [ICC=0.80; 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.28;0.92) and intra-CV=1.5%]. The PAM and Actigraph accelerometer are comparable in assessing bodily movement during treadmill and stair walking. The PAM is a valid device to rank subjects in EE and can be useful in collecting objective data to monitor habitual physical activity.
Keyword Energy expenditure
Physical activity
Reliability measurement
Stair walking
Treadmill walking
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Provisional Code
Institutional Status Non-UQ
Additional Notes Article first published online: 6 FEB 2008

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collections: ERA 2012 Admin Only
School of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 27 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 31 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Wed, 22 Sep 2010, 00:27:12 EST by Laura McTaggart on behalf of Faculty Of Health Sciences