Cargando…

Fourteen days free-living evaluation of an open-source algorithm for counting steps in healthy adults with a large variation in physical activity level

BACKGROUND: The number of steps by an individual, has traditionally been assessed with a pedometer, but increasingly with an accelerometer. The ActiLife software (AL) is the most common way to process accelerometer data to steps, but it is not open source which could aid understanding of measurement...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Holm, Ivar, Fridolfsson, Jonatan, Börjesson, Mats, Arvidsson, Daniel
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10103381/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37060022
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s42490-023-00071-9
_version_ 1785025843359121408
author Holm, Ivar
Fridolfsson, Jonatan
Börjesson, Mats
Arvidsson, Daniel
author_facet Holm, Ivar
Fridolfsson, Jonatan
Börjesson, Mats
Arvidsson, Daniel
author_sort Holm, Ivar
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The number of steps by an individual, has traditionally been assessed with a pedometer, but increasingly with an accelerometer. The ActiLife software (AL) is the most common way to process accelerometer data to steps, but it is not open source which could aid understanding of measurement errors. The aim of this study was to compare assessment of steps from the open-source algorithm part of the GGIR package and two closed algorithms, AL normal (n) and low frequency extension (lfe) algorithms to Yamax pedometer, as reference. Free-living in healthy adults with a wide range of activity level was studied. RESULTS: A total 46 participants divided by activity level into a low-medium active group and a high active group, wore both an accelerometer and a pedometer for 14 days. In total 614 complete days were analyzed. A significant correlation between Yamax and all three algorithms was shown but all comparisons were significantly different with paired t-tests except for ALn vs Yamax. The mean bias shows that ALn slightly overestimated steps in the low-medium active group and slightly underestimated steps in high active group. The mean percentage error (MAPE) was 17% and 9% respectively. The ALlfe overestimated steps by approximately 6700/day in both groups and the MAPE was 88% in the low-medium active group and 43% in the high active group. The open-source algorithm underestimated steps with a systematic error related to activity level. The MAPE was 28% in the low-medium active group and 48% in the high active group. CONCLUSION: The open-source algorithm captures steps fairly well in low-medium active individuals when comparing with Yamax pedometer, but did not show satisfactory results in more active individuals, indicating that it must be modified before implemented in population research. The AL algorithm without the low frequency extension measures similar number of steps as Yamax in free-living and is a useful alternative before a valid open-source algorithm is available.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10103381
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101033812023-04-15 Fourteen days free-living evaluation of an open-source algorithm for counting steps in healthy adults with a large variation in physical activity level Holm, Ivar Fridolfsson, Jonatan Börjesson, Mats Arvidsson, Daniel BMC Biomed Eng Research BACKGROUND: The number of steps by an individual, has traditionally been assessed with a pedometer, but increasingly with an accelerometer. The ActiLife software (AL) is the most common way to process accelerometer data to steps, but it is not open source which could aid understanding of measurement errors. The aim of this study was to compare assessment of steps from the open-source algorithm part of the GGIR package and two closed algorithms, AL normal (n) and low frequency extension (lfe) algorithms to Yamax pedometer, as reference. Free-living in healthy adults with a wide range of activity level was studied. RESULTS: A total 46 participants divided by activity level into a low-medium active group and a high active group, wore both an accelerometer and a pedometer for 14 days. In total 614 complete days were analyzed. A significant correlation between Yamax and all three algorithms was shown but all comparisons were significantly different with paired t-tests except for ALn vs Yamax. The mean bias shows that ALn slightly overestimated steps in the low-medium active group and slightly underestimated steps in high active group. The mean percentage error (MAPE) was 17% and 9% respectively. The ALlfe overestimated steps by approximately 6700/day in both groups and the MAPE was 88% in the low-medium active group and 43% in the high active group. The open-source algorithm underestimated steps with a systematic error related to activity level. The MAPE was 28% in the low-medium active group and 48% in the high active group. CONCLUSION: The open-source algorithm captures steps fairly well in low-medium active individuals when comparing with Yamax pedometer, but did not show satisfactory results in more active individuals, indicating that it must be modified before implemented in population research. The AL algorithm without the low frequency extension measures similar number of steps as Yamax in free-living and is a useful alternative before a valid open-source algorithm is available. BioMed Central 2023-04-14 /pmc/articles/PMC10103381/ /pubmed/37060022 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s42490-023-00071-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Holm, Ivar
Fridolfsson, Jonatan
Börjesson, Mats
Arvidsson, Daniel
Fourteen days free-living evaluation of an open-source algorithm for counting steps in healthy adults with a large variation in physical activity level
title Fourteen days free-living evaluation of an open-source algorithm for counting steps in healthy adults with a large variation in physical activity level
title_full Fourteen days free-living evaluation of an open-source algorithm for counting steps in healthy adults with a large variation in physical activity level
title_fullStr Fourteen days free-living evaluation of an open-source algorithm for counting steps in healthy adults with a large variation in physical activity level
title_full_unstemmed Fourteen days free-living evaluation of an open-source algorithm for counting steps in healthy adults with a large variation in physical activity level
title_short Fourteen days free-living evaluation of an open-source algorithm for counting steps in healthy adults with a large variation in physical activity level
title_sort fourteen days free-living evaluation of an open-source algorithm for counting steps in healthy adults with a large variation in physical activity level
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10103381/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37060022
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s42490-023-00071-9
work_keys_str_mv AT holmivar fourteendaysfreelivingevaluationofanopensourcealgorithmforcountingstepsinhealthyadultswithalargevariationinphysicalactivitylevel
AT fridolfssonjonatan fourteendaysfreelivingevaluationofanopensourcealgorithmforcountingstepsinhealthyadultswithalargevariationinphysicalactivitylevel
AT borjessonmats fourteendaysfreelivingevaluationofanopensourcealgorithmforcountingstepsinhealthyadultswithalargevariationinphysicalactivitylevel
AT arvidssondaniel fourteendaysfreelivingevaluationofanopensourcealgorithmforcountingstepsinhealthyadultswithalargevariationinphysicalactivitylevel