Cargando…
Cross-sectional survey on researchers’ experience in using accelerometers in health-related studies
OBJECTIVES: Accelerometers are widely applied in health studies, but lack of standardisation regarding device placement, sampling and data processing hampers comparability between studies. The objectives of this study were to assess how accelerometers are applied in health-related research and probl...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9086608/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35601138 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2021-001286 |
_version_ | 1784704042119725056 |
---|---|
author | Albrecht, Birte Marie Flaßkamp, Fabian Tristan Koster, Annemarie Eskofier, Bjoern M Bammann, Karin |
author_facet | Albrecht, Birte Marie Flaßkamp, Fabian Tristan Koster, Annemarie Eskofier, Bjoern M Bammann, Karin |
author_sort | Albrecht, Birte Marie |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: Accelerometers are widely applied in health studies, but lack of standardisation regarding device placement, sampling and data processing hampers comparability between studies. The objectives of this study were to assess how accelerometers are applied in health-related research and problems with accelerometer hardware and software encountered by researchers. METHODS: Researchers applying accelerometry in a health context were invited to a cross-sectional web-based survey (August 2020–September 2020). The questionnaire included quantitative questions regarding the application of accelerometers and qualitative questions on encountered hardware and software problems. Descriptive statistics were calculated for quantitative data and content analysis was applied to qualitative data. RESULTS: In total, 116 health researchers were included in the study (response: 13.7%). The most used brand was ActiGraph (67.2%). Independently of brand, the main reason for choosing a device was that it was the standard in the field (57.1%–83.3%). In children and adolescent populations, sampling frequency was higher (mean: 73.3 Hz ±29.9 Hz vs 47.6 Hz ±29.4 Hz) and epoch length (15.0s±15.6s vs 30.1s±25.9s) and non-wear time (42.9 min ±23.7 min vs 65.3 min ±35.4 min) were shorter compared with adult populations. Content analysis revealed eight categories of hardware problems (battery problems, compliance issues, data loss, mechanical problems, electronic problems, sensor problems, lacking waterproofness, other problems) and five categories of software problems (lack of user-friendliness, limited possibilities, bugs, high computational burden, black box character). CONCLUSIONS: The study confirms heterogeneity regarding accelerometer use in health-related research. Moreover, several hardware and software problems were documented. Both aspects must be tackled to increase validity, practicability and comparability of research. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9086608 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-90866082022-05-20 Cross-sectional survey on researchers’ experience in using accelerometers in health-related studies Albrecht, Birte Marie Flaßkamp, Fabian Tristan Koster, Annemarie Eskofier, Bjoern M Bammann, Karin BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med Original Research OBJECTIVES: Accelerometers are widely applied in health studies, but lack of standardisation regarding device placement, sampling and data processing hampers comparability between studies. The objectives of this study were to assess how accelerometers are applied in health-related research and problems with accelerometer hardware and software encountered by researchers. METHODS: Researchers applying accelerometry in a health context were invited to a cross-sectional web-based survey (August 2020–September 2020). The questionnaire included quantitative questions regarding the application of accelerometers and qualitative questions on encountered hardware and software problems. Descriptive statistics were calculated for quantitative data and content analysis was applied to qualitative data. RESULTS: In total, 116 health researchers were included in the study (response: 13.7%). The most used brand was ActiGraph (67.2%). Independently of brand, the main reason for choosing a device was that it was the standard in the field (57.1%–83.3%). In children and adolescent populations, sampling frequency was higher (mean: 73.3 Hz ±29.9 Hz vs 47.6 Hz ±29.4 Hz) and epoch length (15.0s±15.6s vs 30.1s±25.9s) and non-wear time (42.9 min ±23.7 min vs 65.3 min ±35.4 min) were shorter compared with adult populations. Content analysis revealed eight categories of hardware problems (battery problems, compliance issues, data loss, mechanical problems, electronic problems, sensor problems, lacking waterproofness, other problems) and five categories of software problems (lack of user-friendliness, limited possibilities, bugs, high computational burden, black box character). CONCLUSIONS: The study confirms heterogeneity regarding accelerometer use in health-related research. Moreover, several hardware and software problems were documented. Both aspects must be tackled to increase validity, practicability and comparability of research. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-05-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9086608/ /pubmed/35601138 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2021-001286 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Albrecht, Birte Marie Flaßkamp, Fabian Tristan Koster, Annemarie Eskofier, Bjoern M Bammann, Karin Cross-sectional survey on researchers’ experience in using accelerometers in health-related studies |
title | Cross-sectional survey on researchers’ experience in using accelerometers in health-related studies |
title_full | Cross-sectional survey on researchers’ experience in using accelerometers in health-related studies |
title_fullStr | Cross-sectional survey on researchers’ experience in using accelerometers in health-related studies |
title_full_unstemmed | Cross-sectional survey on researchers’ experience in using accelerometers in health-related studies |
title_short | Cross-sectional survey on researchers’ experience in using accelerometers in health-related studies |
title_sort | cross-sectional survey on researchers’ experience in using accelerometers in health-related studies |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9086608/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35601138 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2021-001286 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT albrechtbirtemarie crosssectionalsurveyonresearchersexperienceinusingaccelerometersinhealthrelatedstudies AT flaßkampfabiantristan crosssectionalsurveyonresearchersexperienceinusingaccelerometersinhealthrelatedstudies AT kosterannemarie crosssectionalsurveyonresearchersexperienceinusingaccelerometersinhealthrelatedstudies AT eskofierbjoernm crosssectionalsurveyonresearchersexperienceinusingaccelerometersinhealthrelatedstudies AT bammannkarin crosssectionalsurveyonresearchersexperienceinusingaccelerometersinhealthrelatedstudies |