Calibration of GENEActiv accelerometer wrist cut-points for the assessment of physical activity intensity of preschool aged children

This study sought to validate cut-points for use of wrist worn GENEActiv accelerometer data, to analyse preschool children’s (4 to 5 year olds) physical activity (PA) levels via calibration with oxygen consumption values (VO2). This was a laboratory based calibration study. Twenty-one preschool children, aged 4.7 ± 0.5 years old, completed six activities (ranging from lying supine to running) whilst wearing the GENEActiv accelerometers at two locations (left and right wrist), these being the participants’ non-dominant and dominant wrist, and a Cortex face mask for gas analysis. VO2 data was used for the assessment of criterion validity. Location specific activity intensity cut points were established via Receiver Operator Characteristic curve (ROC) analysis. The GENEActiv accelerometers, irrespective of their location, accurately discriminated between all PA intensities (sedentary, light, and moderate and above), with the dominant wrist monitor providing a slightly more precise discrimination at light PA and the non-dominant at the sedentary behaviour and moderate and above intensity levels (Area Under the Curve (AUC) for non-dominant = 0.749-0.993, compared to AUC dominant = 0.760-0.988). Conclusion: This study establishes wrist-worn physical activity cut points for the GENEActiv accelerometer in pre-schoolers.

This study sought to validate cut-points for use of wrist worn GENEActiv accelerometer data, to analyse preschool children’s (4 to 5 year olds) physical activity (PA) levels via calibration with oxygen consumption values (VO2). This was a laboratory based calibration study. Twenty-one preschool children, aged 4.7 ± 0.5 years old, completed six activities (ranging from lying supine to running) whilst wearing the GENEActiv accelerometers at two locations (left and right wrist), these being the participants’ non-dominant and dominant wrist, and a Cortex face mask for gas analysis. VO2 data was used for the assessment of criterion validity. Location specific activity intensity cut points were established via Receiver Operator Characteristic curve (ROC) analysis. The GENEActiv accelerometers, irrespective of their location, accurately discriminated between all PA intensities (sedentary, light, and moderate and above), with the dominant wrist monitor providing a slightly more precise discrimination at light PA and the non-dominant at the sedentary behaviour and moderate and above intensity levels (Area Under the Curve (AUC) for non-dominant = 0.749-0.993, compared to AUC dominant = 0.760-0.988).
Conclusion: This study establishes wrist-worn physical activity cut points for the GENEActiv accelerometer in pre-schoolers.

Archived with thanks to European Journal of Pediatrics