Cited by 46Physical Activity and HealthStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryContext-Aware Activity Recognition Systems

Validating Accelerometry as a Measure of Physical Activity and Energy Expenditure in Chronic Stroke

Open access
Serra, Monica C., Balraj, Elizabeth, DiSanzo, Beth L., Ivey, Frederick M., Hafer-Macko, Charlene E., Treuth, Margarita S., Ryan, Alice S.·2017·Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Accelerometers can objectively measure steps taken per day in individuals without gait deficits, but accelerometers also have the ability to estimate frequency, intensity, and duration of physical activity. However, thresholds to distinguish varying levels of activity intensity using the Actical brand accelerometer are standardized only for the general population and may underestimate intensity in stroke. OBJECTIVE: To derive Actical activity count thresholds specific to stroke disability for use in more accurately gauging time spent at differing activity levels. METHODS: ) participated in the study. Actical accelerometers were placed on the non-paretic hip to obtain accelerometry counts during eight activities of varying intensity: (1) watching TV; (2) seated stretching; (3) standing stretching; (4) floor sweeping; (5) stepping in place; (6) over-ground walking; (7) lower speed treadmill walking (1.0 mph at 4% incline); and (8) higher speed treadmill walking (2.0 mph at 4% incline). Simultaneous portable monitoring (Cosmed K4b2) enabled quantification of energy cost for each activity in metabolic equivalents (METs, or oxygen consumption in multiples of resting level). Measurements were obtained for 10 min of standard rest and 5 min during each of the eight activities. RESULTS: Regression analysis yielded the following new stroke-specific Actical minimum thresholds: 125 counts per minute (cpm) for sedentary/light activity, 667 cpm for light/moderate activity, and 1546 cpm for moderate/vigorous activity. CONCLUSION: Our revised cut points better reflect activity levels after stroke and suggest significantly lower thresholds relative to those observed for the general population of healthy individuals. We conclude that the standard, commonly applied Actical thresholds are inappropriate for this unique population.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10749357.2016.1183866

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The accelerometers underestimate PAEE in stroke patients, probably slightly less for sedentary/light activities that are more typical for non-ambulatory stroke survivors.

    “The accelerometers underestimate PAEE in stroke patients, probably slightly less for sedentary/light activities [76] that are more typical for non-ambulatory stroke survivors.”

    From Physical Activity, Psychological and Functional Outcomes in Non-Ambulatory Stroke Patients during Rehabilitation—A Pilot Study (2022) · cites this paper as [76]

    The Discussion (page not available) says that standard Actical thresholds somewhat adequately distinguish sedentary/light activity but drastically underestimate energy expenditure during more intense activity in stroke survivors with hemiparetic gait. It does not establish that energy expenditure is underestimated during sedentary/light activity, or test whether those activities are more typical of non-ambulatory survivors. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The PAEE for any given task is higher in stroke compared with the general non-disabled population.

    “What is more, the PAEE for any given task is higher in stroke compared with the general non-disabled population.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Serra, M. C., Balraj, E., DiSanzo, B. L., Ivey, F. M., Hafer-Macko, C. E., Treuth, M. S., & Ryan, A. S.
Affiliations
  • University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
  • University of Maryland Eastern Shore (US)
Corresponding author
Ryan, Alice S.
Venue
Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation
Published
2016-06-20
Volume
24
Issue
1
Pages
18-23
ISSN
  • 1074-9357 (ISSN-L)
  • 1945-5119
OpenAlex
W2470544830
Cited by
46
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1
FWCI
3.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (R01-AG030075, P30-AG028747)
  • Veterans Affairs (B7257R)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Context-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
Keywords
accelerometry, physical activity, energy expenditure, chronic stroke, cut points, metabolic equivalents, treadmill walking, sedentary behavior
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Body Composition, Calorimetry, Chronic Disease, Energy Metabolism, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Oxygen Consumption, Regression Analysis, Reproducibility of Results, Exercise, Absorptiometry, Photon, Stroke, Accelerometry

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