MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

VALIDITY OF ASSESSMENT OF DAILY ENERGY EXPENDITURE IN A RESPIRATION CHAMBER BY ACCELEROMETRY LOCATED ON THE WAIST VS THE WRIST OR IN COMBINATION

2002· article· en· W1980227823 on OpenAlexaff
Hideaki Kumahara, Mayumi Yoshioka, Kojiro Ishii, Y Yoshitake, Munehiro Shindo, Y. Schütz, Hirofumi Tanaka

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIntegrated Energy Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccelerometerWaistEnergy expenditureWristMedicinePhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysicsInternal medicineSurgeryBody mass index

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: We have reported that the energy expenditure (EE) estimated by uniaxial accelerometry in the vertical plane (Lifecorder, Suzuken Co.; LC) located on the waist was highly correlated with EE measured in a respiration chamber (MSSE.33:s251,2001). On the other hand, slight movements of the limbs (i.e. fidgeting) also seem to play an important role in daily EE. The purpose of this study was to investigate the validity of accelerometry as a predictor of daily EE when two accelerometers are used separately, one on the wrist and the other one on the waist levels, or in combination. METHODS: In 55 healthy Japanese (37+/− 12 y of age, BMI = 21.7+/− 3.3 kg/m2) we measured 24-h EE in a respiration chamber. The subjects were prescribed two 30 min walking exercises on the treadmill (3.9, 5.1km/h, flat) and the sleeping duration was controlled (for 8-h). The subjects wore two LCs, one on the belt (LCbeit) and the other one on the wrist of the dominant arm (LCwrist). Linear regressions were calculated between measured EE normalized for body weight (kcal/kg*h) and LC activity levels assessed by acceleration (11 levels; 0, 0.5 and 1 to 9), and LCbeit vs LCwrist after these values were averaged over 15-min periods for a total of 16-h. RESULTS: There were highly significant relationships between EE and both accelerometric measures. The degree of correlation between LCbeit and EE was higher than that between LCwrist and EE: r = 0.817 p < 0.001, SEE = 0.41 vs r = 0.694 p < 0.001, SEE = 0.51, respectively. If treadmill walking periods are not considered, both correlations were found to be lower: r = 0.557 p < 0.001, SEE = 0.38 vs r = 0.476 p < 0.001, SEE = 0.40, respectively. When multiple regression analysis was used to explore the effect of the addition of LCwrist to LCbeit, the variance improved only by 0.8% including treadmill periods and 2.5% excluding treadmill periods. There were significant relationships between the activity levels measured by the 2 accelerations locations: r = 0.782 p < 0.001 with treadmill periods, r = 0.629 p < 0.001 without treadmill periods. CONCLUSION: Adding LCwrist to LCbeit did not substantially improve the degree of prediction of daily energy expenditure. As a result, single accelerometer located on the waist level has sufficient validity for the estimation of the daily energy expenditure in confined conditions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score0.373

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseSame topicIntegrated Energy Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207