Diane K. Ehlers, Jonathan Kurka and Barbara Ainsworth contributed equally to this work.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
All authors contributed equally to this work. JH conceived the study, designed and implemented the study and prepared the manuscript. DE implemented the study, collected, entered, and analyzed data and contributed to preparation of the manuscript. JK analyzed data and contributed to preparation of the manuscript. BA assisted in design and implementation of the study and preparation of the manuscript. MB helped design the study, supervised data collection, processing, and analysis, and contributed to preparation of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
The purpose of this study is to determine the feasibility of three widely used wearable sensors in research settings for 24 h monitoring of sleep, sedentary, and active behaviors in middle-aged women.
Participants were 21 inactive, overweight (M Body Mass Index (BMI) = 29.27 ± 7.43) women, 30 to 64 years (M = 45.31 ± 9.67). Women were instructed to wear each sensor on the non-dominant hip (ActiGraph GT3X+), wrist (GENEActiv), or upper arm (BodyMedia SenseWear Mini) for 24 h/day and record daily wake and bed times for one week over the course of three consecutive weeks. Women received feedback about their daily physical activity and sleep behaviors. Feasibility (i.e., acceptability and demand) was measured using surveys, interviews, and wear time.
Women felt the GENEActiv (94.7 %) and SenseWear Mini (90.0 %) were easier to wear and preferred the placement (68.4, 80 % respectively) as compared to the ActiGraph (42.9, 47.6 % respectively). Mean wear time on valid days was similar across sensors (ActiGraph: M = 918.8 ± 115.0 min; GENEActiv: M = 949.3 ± 86.6; SenseWear: M = 928.0 ± 101.8) and well above other studies using wake time only protocols. Informational feedback was the biggest motivator, while appearance, comfort, and inconvenience were the biggest barriers to wearing sensors. Wear time was valid on 93.9 % (ActiGraph), 100 % (GENEActiv), and 95.2 % (SenseWear) of eligible days. 61.9, 95.2, and 71.4 % of participants had seven valid days of data for the ActiGraph, GENEActiv, and SenseWear, respectively.
Twenty-four hour monitoring over seven consecutive days is a feasible approach in middle-aged women. Researchers should consider participant acceptability and demand, in addition to validity and reliability, when choosing a wearable sensor. More research is needed across populations and study designs.
Health behaviors of adults: United states, 2005-2007. [ http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_10/sr10_245.pdf].
Garber CE, Blissmer B, Deschenes MR, Franklin BA, Lamonte MJ, Le I, et al. Quantity and quality of exercise for developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory, musculoskeletal, and neuromotor fitness in apparently healthy adults: Guidance for prescribing exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011;43:1334–59. CrossRefPubMed
Marcus BH, Forsyth LH. Motivating people to be physically active. 2nd ed. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 2008.
Freedson PS, Melanson E, Sirard J. Calibration of the computer science and applications, inc. accelerometer. Med Sci Sports Exer. 1998;30:777–81. CrossRef
Sadeh A, Sharkey KM, Carskadon MA. Activity-based sleep-wake identification: an empirical test of methodological issues. Sleep. 1994;17:201–7. PubMed
Te Lindert B, Van Someren E. Sleep estimates using microelectromechanical systems (MEMS). Sleep. 2012;36:781–9.
Welk G, McClain J, Eisenmann J, Wickel E. Field validation of the mti actigraph and bodymedia armband monitor using the ideea monitor. Obesity. 2000;15:918–28. CrossRef
Miles MB, Huberman AM. Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 1994.
- Feasibility of three wearable sensors for 24 hour monitoring in middle-aged women
Diane K. Ehlers
- BioMed Central
Neu im Fachgebiet Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe
Meistgelesene Bücher aus dem Fachgebiet
e.Med Kampagnen-Visual, Mail Icon II