在 ActiLife 和 RStudio 中生成的 ActiGraph 计数的 24 小时活动周期输出的可比性

A. Montoye, Kimberly A. Clevenger, Benjamin D. Boudreaux, Michael D. Schmidt
{"title":"在 ActiLife 和 RStudio 中生成的 ActiGraph 计数的 24 小时活动周期输出的可比性","authors":"A. Montoye, Kimberly A. Clevenger, Benjamin D. Boudreaux, Michael D. Schmidt","doi":"10.1123/jmpb.2023-0047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Data from ActiGraph accelerometers have long been imported into ActiLife software, where the company’s proprietary “activity counts” were generated in order to understand physical behavior metrics. In 2022, ActiGraph released an open-source method to generate activity counts from any raw, triaxial accelerometer data using Python, which has been translated into RStudio packages. However, it is unclear if outcomes are comparable when generated in ActiLife and RStudio. Therefore, the authors’ technical note systematically compared activity counts and related physical behavior metrics generated from ActiGraph accelerometer data using ActiLife or available packages in RStudio and provides example code to ease implementation of such analyses in RStudio. In addition to comparing triaxial activity counts, physical behavior outputs (sleep, sedentary behavior, light-intensity physical activity, and moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity) were compared using multiple nonwear algorithms, epochs, cut points, sleep scoring algorithms, and accelerometer placement sites. Activity counts and physical behavior outcomes were largely the same between ActiLife and the tested packages in RStudio. However, peculiarities in the application of nonwear algorithms to the first and last portions of a data file (that occurred on partial, first or last days of data collection), differences in rounding, and handling of counts values on the borderline of activity intensities resulted in small but inconsequential differences in some files. The hope is that researchers and both hardware and software manufacturers continue to push efforts toward transparency in data analysis and interpretation, which will enhance comparability across devices and studies and help to advance fields examining links between physical behavior and health.","PeriodicalId":73572,"journal":{"name":"Journal for the measurement of physical behaviour","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparability of 24-hr Activity Cycle Outputs From ActiGraph Counts Generated in ActiLife and RStudio\",\"authors\":\"A. Montoye, Kimberly A. Clevenger, Benjamin D. Boudreaux, Michael D. Schmidt\",\"doi\":\"10.1123/jmpb.2023-0047\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Data from ActiGraph accelerometers have long been imported into ActiLife software, where the company’s proprietary “activity counts” were generated in order to understand physical behavior metrics. In 2022, ActiGraph released an open-source method to generate activity counts from any raw, triaxial accelerometer data using Python, which has been translated into RStudio packages. However, it is unclear if outcomes are comparable when generated in ActiLife and RStudio. Therefore, the authors’ technical note systematically compared activity counts and related physical behavior metrics generated from ActiGraph accelerometer data using ActiLife or available packages in RStudio and provides example code to ease implementation of such analyses in RStudio. In addition to comparing triaxial activity counts, physical behavior outputs (sleep, sedentary behavior, light-intensity physical activity, and moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity) were compared using multiple nonwear algorithms, epochs, cut points, sleep scoring algorithms, and accelerometer placement sites. Activity counts and physical behavior outcomes were largely the same between ActiLife and the tested packages in RStudio. However, peculiarities in the application of nonwear algorithms to the first and last portions of a data file (that occurred on partial, first or last days of data collection), differences in rounding, and handling of counts values on the borderline of activity intensities resulted in small but inconsequential differences in some files. The hope is that researchers and both hardware and software manufacturers continue to push efforts toward transparency in data analysis and interpretation, which will enhance comparability across devices and studies and help to advance fields examining links between physical behavior and health.\",\"PeriodicalId\":73572,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal for the measurement of physical behaviour\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal for the measurement of physical behaviour\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1123/jmpb.2023-0047\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for the measurement of physical behaviour","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/jmpb.2023-0047","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

长期以来,ActiGraph加速度计的数据一直被导入ActiLife软件,并在其中生成该公司专有的 "活动计数",以了解身体行为指标。2022 年,ActiGraph 发布了一种开源方法,可使用 Python 从任何原始的三轴加速度计数据生成活动计数,该方法已被翻译成 RStudio 软件包。然而,目前还不清楚 ActiLife 和 RStudio 生成的结果是否具有可比性。因此,作者的技术说明系统地比较了使用 ActiLife 或 RStudio 中的可用软件包从 ActiGraph 加速计数据生成的活动计数和相关身体行为指标,并提供了示例代码,以方便在 RStudio 中实施此类分析。除了比较三轴活动计数外,还使用多种非磨损算法、历时、切点、睡眠评分算法和加速度计放置位置对身体行为输出(睡眠、久坐行为、轻度体力活动和中高强度体力活动)进行了比较。ActiLife 和 RStudio 中测试的软件包的活动计数和身体行为结果基本相同。不过,在对数据文件的第一部分和最后一部分(发生在数据收集的部分、第一天或最后一天)应用非磨损算法时的特殊性、四舍五入的差异以及对活动强度边界上的计数值的处理导致某些文件中存在微小但无关紧要的差异。我们希望研究人员、硬件和软件制造商继续努力提高数据分析和解释的透明度,这将增强不同设备和研究之间的可比性,并有助于推动研究身体行为与健康之间联系的领域的发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparability of 24-hr Activity Cycle Outputs From ActiGraph Counts Generated in ActiLife and RStudio
Data from ActiGraph accelerometers have long been imported into ActiLife software, where the company’s proprietary “activity counts” were generated in order to understand physical behavior metrics. In 2022, ActiGraph released an open-source method to generate activity counts from any raw, triaxial accelerometer data using Python, which has been translated into RStudio packages. However, it is unclear if outcomes are comparable when generated in ActiLife and RStudio. Therefore, the authors’ technical note systematically compared activity counts and related physical behavior metrics generated from ActiGraph accelerometer data using ActiLife or available packages in RStudio and provides example code to ease implementation of such analyses in RStudio. In addition to comparing triaxial activity counts, physical behavior outputs (sleep, sedentary behavior, light-intensity physical activity, and moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity) were compared using multiple nonwear algorithms, epochs, cut points, sleep scoring algorithms, and accelerometer placement sites. Activity counts and physical behavior outcomes were largely the same between ActiLife and the tested packages in RStudio. However, peculiarities in the application of nonwear algorithms to the first and last portions of a data file (that occurred on partial, first or last days of data collection), differences in rounding, and handling of counts values on the borderline of activity intensities resulted in small but inconsequential differences in some files. The hope is that researchers and both hardware and software manufacturers continue to push efforts toward transparency in data analysis and interpretation, which will enhance comparability across devices and studies and help to advance fields examining links between physical behavior and health.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信