Comparison between data processing from GT3X+ accelerometer for vigorous moderate physical activity

• Autor(a) principal: Soares, Andrew
• Data de Publicação: 2022
• Outros Autores: Pancoti, Barbara Moço, Oliveira, Aldair José de
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Journal of Physical Education (Maringá)
• Texto Completo: https://periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/RevEducFis/article/view/59805
• topic: ActiGraph; GGIR; Accelerometer; Physical activity; Adults.; ActiGraph; GGIR; Acelerômetro; Atividade física; Adultos

The use of accelerometers to measure physical activity in epidemiological research presents challenges to increase comparability between studies that use this equipment. In this sense, the objective of this work is to compare time estimates in MVPA for adults from different data processing methods, using the Actigraph GT3X+ accelerometer. This is a cross-sectional study, from the baseline of the pilot study of the Longitudinal Study of the Determinants of Physical Activity. Sample had 31 outsourced employees of both genders, with an average age of 47.05 years (SD=9.35). Participants used GT3X+ model accelerometers for seven consecutive days. The MVPA time estimate was generated using Actilife and R-package GGIR software. Descriptive statistical analyses, ANOVA and Bonferroni post-hoc for comparability were performed in the R software. Bland-Altman analysis was performed in SigmaPlot to assess bias and agreement. There was a significant difference in the mean time of MVPA between count-based data and raw data (p<0.001). The average time in MVPA was shorter from processing by raw data than in counts (-264.81 min/day; p<0.001). Concluding that the findings suggest that there is no statistically equivalence between the methods compared to estimate MVPA time.