Cited by 705Physical Activity and HealthContext-Aware Activity Recognition SystemsMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Best Practices for Using Physical Activity Monitors in Population-Based Research

Open access
MATTHEWS, CHARLES E., HAGSTRÖMER, MARIA, POBER, DAVID M., BOWLES, HEATHER R.·2012·Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise

Abstract

The use of physical activity monitors in population-based research has increased dramatically in the past decade. In this report, we review the major purpose for using physical activity monitors in different types of population-based studies (i.e., surveillance, intervention, association studies) and discuss the strengths and weaknesses for the various behavioral outcomes derived from monitors for each study type. We also update and extend previous recommendations for use of these instruments in large-scale studies, particularly with respect to selecting monitor systems in the context of technological advances that have occurred in recent years. The current state of the science with respect to optimal measurement schedules for use of physical activity monitors is also discussed. A checklist and flowchart are provided so that investigators have more guidance when reporting key elements of monitor use in their studies.

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/mss.0b013e3182399e5b

Cites

42 of 42 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?

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
MATTHEWS, C. E., HAGSTRÖMER, M., POBER, D. M., & BOWLES, H. R.
Affiliations
National Cancer Institute (US)
Venue
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Published
2012-01
Volume
44
Issue
1S
Pages
S68-S76
ISSN
0195-9131 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2060699725
Cited by
703
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 40 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 54 · 2021: 51 · 2020: 65 · 2019: 60 · 2018: 57 · 2017: 62 · 2016: 47 · 2015: 49 · 2014: 48 · 2013: 39 · 2012: 11
FWCI
21.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (Z99 CA999999)
  • National Cancer Institute (Y99 CA999999)
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
wearable activity trackers, accelerometer, population-based study, physical activity surveillance, reporting checklist, large-scale research
MeSH terms
Humans, Monitoring, Physiologic, Motor Activity, Biomedical Research

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