Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 293

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The utility of the Digi-Walker step counter to assess daily physical activity patterns

WELK, GREGORY J., DIFFERDING, JEROME A., THOMPSON, RAYMOND W., BLAIR, STEVEN N., DZIURA, JIM, HART, PETER·2000·Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
DOI 10.1097/00005768-200009001-00007
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

PURPOSE: The Digi-Walker step counter is a promising and cost-effective tool to measure physical activity under free-living conditions. Two specific studies were conducted to evaluate the number of steps required to meet current physical activity guidelines. METHODS: Thirty-one adults (17 men, 14 women) served as participants. In study 1, we determined the number of steps to complete a mile under two different conditions and three paces. In study 2, we conducted a field trial to examine the relationship between daily step counts and other indices of physical activity. Participants in this study wore a Digi-Walker for 2 consecutive weeks and completed the 7-d physical activity recall (PAR) after each week. RESULTS: In study 1, there were no differences in step counts by site, but steps were inversely related to pace, with values ranging from 1330 to 1996. Individual step counts at a specific pace were negatively correlated with height, weight, leg length, and stride length and were positively correlated with body fatness. In study 2, participants had average daily step counts of 11,603 when structured vigorous activity was included and 8265 when only light and moderate activity were measured. Modest correlations were found between step counts and estimated energy expenditure. Similar correlations were observed when step counts were related to minutes of activity per day and minutes of sitting per day. CONCLUSIONS: Pedometers provide a useful indicator of daily step counts but variability in activity patterns make it difficult to establish step count guidelines that correspond with other public health guidelines.

Overview

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 · 10.1097/00005768-200009001-00007

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
WELK, G. J., DIFFERDING, J. A., THOMPSON, R. W., BLAIR, S. N., DZIURA, J., & HART, P.
Venue
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2000-09
Volume
32
Issue
Supplement
Pages
S481-S488
ISSN
0195-9131 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1097/00005768-200009001-00007
OpenAlex
W1974343745
Cited by
293
References
5
FWCI
5.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.