Our office will remain closed through Friday, September 18th as we continue to assess the damages caused by Hurricane Sally. ActiGraph team members are working remotely, however shipping delays should be expected at this time. We expect to resume regular business hours on Monday, September 21st. If you need immediate assistance, please contact us by email at firstname.lastname@example.org and we will respond as quickly as possible. Thank you for your continued support.
SenseCam-coded body positions associated with accelerometer-determined cadence
- Presented on May 21, 2014
Purpose: To quantify the proportion (%) of time spent in different body positions within incremental bands of accelerometer determined cadence (steps/min).
Methods: This was a secondary analysis of SenseCam camera images and ActiGraph GT3X+ accelerometer data concurrently worn during waking hours by 40 adults (70% male; 36±12 years-old; BMI=23±3 kg/m2) for 3-5 days. Body positions coded from images included: 1) sedentary, 2) standing still, 3) standing moving, 4) walking/running, 5) biking, or 6) changing position. For each participant, we calculated the proportion of time spent in each body position within previously published incremental cadence bands: 0 (non-movement during wearing time), 1-19 (incidental movement), 20-39 (sporadic movement), 40-59 (purposeful steps), 60-79 (slow walking), 80-99 (medium walking), 100-119 (brisk walking), and 120+ steps/min (all faster locomotion). Means and 95% confidence intervals (bootstrapped) were computed to describe the sample-level proportion of time spent in each body position within each cadence band.
Results: Sedentary behavior was more frequent at lower cadences, M=78% (CI: 72-81%) at 0 steps/min and M=43% (CI: 39-49%) at 1-19 steps/min, and less frequent at higher cadences, M=1% (CI: 0-4%) at 100-119 steps/min and M=1% (CI: 0-3%) at 120+ steps/min. Standing (still or moving), walking/running, biking, and changing position were more frequent at higher cadences, with walking/running most frequently identified, M=71% (CI: 63-79%) at 80-99 steps/min, M=90% (CI: 83-95%) at 100-119 steps/min, and M=87% (CI: 70-95%) at 120+ steps/min.
Conclusions: Further research is needed to evaluate the validity of cadence as a simple form of pattern analysis for identifying body positions.
- Mahara Proenca
- John Schuna
- Jacqueline Kerr
- Simon Marshall
- Catrine Tudor-Locke
ISBNPA 2014 Annual Conference