Cited by 56Physical Activity and HealthContext-Aware Activity Recognition SystemsMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Study to Determine the Criterion Validity of the SenseWear Armband as a Measure of Physical Activity in People With Rheumatoid Arthritis

Tierney, Marie, Fraser, Alexander, Purtill, Helen, Kennedy, Norelee·2013·Arthritis Care & Research

Abstract

Objective: Measuring physical activity in people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is of great importance in light of the increased mortality in this population due to cardiovascular disease. Validation of activity monitors in specific populations is recommended to ensure the accuracy of physical activity measurement. Thus, the purpose of this study was to determine the validity of the SenseWear Pro3 Armband (SWA) as a measure of physical activity during activities of daily living (ADL) in people with RA. Methods: Fourteen subjects (8 men and 6 women) with a diagnosis of RA were recruited from rheumatology clinics at the Mid‐Western Regional Hospitals, Limerick, Ireland. Participants undertook a series of ADL of varying intensities. The SWA was compared to the criterion measures of the Oxycon Mobile indirect calorimetry system (energy expenditure in kJ) and of manual video observation (step count). Bland and Altman, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and correlation analyses were done using SPSS, version 19.0. Results: The SWA showed substantial agreement (ICC 0.717, P < 0.001) and a strong relationship (Pearson's correlation coefficient = 0.852) compared with the criterion measure when estimating energy expenditure during ADL. However, it was found that the SWA overestimated energy expenditure, particularly at higher intensity levels. The ability of the SWA to estimate step counts during ADL was poor (ICC 0.304, P = 0.038). Conclusion: The SWA can be considered a valid tool to estimate energy expenditure during ADL in the RA population; however, attention should be paid to its tendency to overestimate energy expenditure.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/acr.21914

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tierney, M., Fraser, A., Purtill, H., & Kennedy, N.
Affiliations
  • University of Limerick (IE)
  • University Hospital Limerick (IE)
Venue
Arthritis Care & Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-05-30
Volume
65
Issue
6
Pages
888-895
ISSN
  • 0893-7524 (ISSN-L)
  • 2151-464X
  • 2151-4658
OpenAlex
W1554038361
Cited by
56
References
51
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 2
FWCI
3.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Arthritis Care & Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Context-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
rheumatoid arthritis, physical activity measurement, criterion validity, energy expenditure, activities of daily living, step count, wearable activity trackers, cardiovascular risk
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Aged, Arthritis, Rheumatoid, Calorimetry, Indirect, Energy Metabolism, Female, Humans, Ireland, Male, Middle Aged, Monitoring, Physiologic, Motor Activity, Reproducibility of Results

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review