The Actiheart in Adolescents: A Doubly Labelled Water Validation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the validity of the Actiheart device for estimating free-living physical activity energy expenditure (PAEE) in adolescents. SUBJECTS/METHODS: Total energy expenditure (TEE) was measured in eighteen Canadian adolescents, aged 15-18 years, by DLW. Physical activity energy expenditure was calculated as 0.9 X TEE minus resting energy expenditure, assuming 10% for the thermic effect of feeding. Participants wore the chest mounted Actiheart device which records simultaneously minute-by-minute acceleration (ACC) and heart rate (HR). Using both children and adult branched equation modeling, derived from laboratory-based activity, PAEE was estimated from the ACC and HR data. Linear regression analyses examined the association between PAEE derived from the Actiheart and DLW method where DLW PAEE served as the dependent variable. Measurement of agreement between the two methods was analyzed using the Bland-Altman procedure. RESULTS: A nonsignificant association was found between the children derived Actiheart and DLW PAEE values (R = .23, R(2) = .05, p = .36); whereas a significant association was found between the adult derived Actiheart and DLW PAEE values (R = .53, R(2) = .29, p < .05). Both the children and adult equation models lead to overestimations of PAEE by the Actiheart compared with the DLW method, by a mean difference of 31.42 kcal.kg(-1).d(-1) (95% limits of agreement: -45.70 to -17.15 kcal.kg(-1).d(-1) and 9.80 kcal.kg(-1).d(-1) (95% limits of agreement: -21.22-1.72 kcal.kg(-1).d(-1)), respectively. CONCLUSION: There is relatively poor measurement of agreement between the Actiheart and DLW for assessing free-living PAEE in adolescents. Future work should develop group based branched equation models specifically for adolescents to improve the utility of the device in this population.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it