liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Evaluations of Actiheart, IDEEA and RT3 monitors for estimating activity energy expenditure in  free-living women
Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences. (Nutrition)
Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences. Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden . (nutrition)
Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences. (nutrition)
2013 (English)In: Journal of Nutritional Science, ISSN 2048-6790, E-ISSN 2048-6790, Vol. 2, no e31Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Activity energy expenditure (AEE) during free-living conditions can be assessed using devices based on different principles. To make proper comparisons of different devices' capacities to assess AEE, they should be evaluated in the same population. Thus, in the present study we evaluated, in the same group of subjects, the ability of three devices to assess AEE in groups and individuals during free-living conditions. In twenty women, AEE was assessed using RT3 (three-axial accelerometry) (AEERT3), Actiheart (a combination of heart rate and accelerometry) (AEEActi) and IDEEA (a multi-accelerometer system) (AEEIDEEA). Reference AEE (AEEref) was assessed using the doubly labelled water method and indirect calorimetry. Average AEEActi was 5760 kJ per 24 h and not significantly different from AEEref (5020 kJ per 24 h). On average, AEERT3 and AEEIDEEA were 2010 and 1750 kJ per 24 h lower than AEEref, respectively (P < 0·001). The limits of agreement (± 2 sd) were 2940 (Actiheart), 1820 (RT3) and 2650 (IDEEA) kJ per 24 h. The variance for AEERT3 was lower than for AEEActi (P = 0·006). The RT3 classified 60 % of the women in the correct activity category while the corresponding value for IDEEA and Actiheart was 30 %. In conclusion, the Actiheart may be useful for groups and the RT3 for individuals while the IDEEA requires further development. The results are likely to be relevant for a large proportion of Western women of reproductive age and demonstrate that the procedure selected to assess physical activity can greatly influence the possibilities to uncover important aspects regarding interactions between physical activity, diet and health.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Cambridge University Press, 2013. Vol. 2, no e31
Keyword [en]
Activity energy expenditure, Accuracy, Activity monitors, Doubly labelled water
National Category
Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-107511DOI: 10.1017/jns.2013.18OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-107511DiVA: diva2:724894
Available from: 2014-06-13 Created: 2014-06-13 Last updated: 2017-12-05Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Authority records BETA

Forsum, ElisabetLöf, MarieHenriksson, Hanna

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Forsum, ElisabetLöf, MarieHenriksson, Hanna
By organisation
Department of Clinical and Experimental MedicineFaculty of Health Sciences
In the same journal
Journal of Nutritional Science
Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 50 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf