Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 347

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reexamination of Validity and Reliability of the CSA Monitor in Walking and Running

BRAGE, S??REN, WEDDERKOPP, NIELS, FRANKS, PAUL W., BO ANDERSEN, LARS, FROBERG, KARSTEN·2003·Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the reliability and validity of the CSA (model 7164) accelerometer (MTI) in a wide walking-running speed range in laboratory and field. METHOD: Twelve male subjects performed three treadmill walking/running sessions and one field trial with the same continuous protocol involving progressively increasing velocities at 5 min per interval from 3 to 6 km x h(-1) (walking) and 8 to 20 km x h(-1) (running). In the field trial, this protocol was terminated after 35 min (14 km.h(-1)), but the trial then extended with 5-km running at a freely chosen velocity. In both scenarios, two CSAs were mounted on each hip and the step frequency measured at each velocity. Oxygen uptake VO(2) x kg(-1) was measured on the last two treadmill sessions. Correlation analyses were performed for mean CSA output relationship with speed, VO(2) per kilogram, and step frequency. RESULTS: In all trials, CSA output rose linearly (R2 = 0.92, P < 0.001) with increasing speed until 9 km.h-1 but remained at approximately 10000 counts.min-1 during running, thus underestimating VO(2) per kilogram at speeds > 9 km x h(-1). Estimation errors increased with speed from 11% (P < 0.01) at 10 km x h(-1) to 48% (P < 0.001) at 16 km x h(-1), when assuming a linear relationship. Freely chosen velocities in the field trial ranged from 10.9 to 16.3 km.h-1. No difference in the CSA-speed relationship was observed between the two scenarios. Differences in CSA output between subjects could partially be attributed to differences in step frequency (R = -0.34 (P = 0.02) for walking and R = -0.63 (P < 0.001) for running). CONCLUSION: CSA output increases linearly with speed in the walking range but not in running, presumably due to relatively constant vertical acceleration in running. Between-subject reliability was related to step frequency because CSA data are filtered most at higher movement frequencies. Epidemiological CSA data should thus be interpreted with these limitations in mind.

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 · 10.1249/01.mss.0000079078.62035.ec

Cites

4 of 4 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 4 references

Cited by

See all 347

Metadata

Authors
BRAGE, S., WEDDERKOPP, N., FRANKS, P. W., BO ANDERSEN, L., & FROBERG, K.
Venue
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Published
2003-08
Volume
35
Issue
8
Pages
1447-1454
ISSN
0195-9131 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2089180972
Cited by
347
References
4
FWCI
5.79
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Reexamination of Validity and Reliability of the CSA Monitor in Walking and Running. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1249/01.mss.0000079078.62035.ec
The paper
BRAGE, S., WEDDERKOPP, N., FRANKS, P. W., BO ANDERSEN, L., & FROBERG, K. (2003). Reexamination of Validity and Reliability of the CSA Monitor in Walking and Running. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. https://doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0000079078.62035.ec

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.