Beyond the (Log)book: Comparing Accelerometer Nonwear Detection Techniques in Toddlers.

Background: Accelerometers are increasingly used to measure physical activity and sedentary time in toddlers. Data cleaning or wear time validation can impact outcomes of interest, particularly in young children who spend less time awake. However, no study has systematically compared wear time valid...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Child: Care, Health & Development Vol. 51; no. 4; pp. 1 - 12
Autores principales: Letts, Elyse, da Silva, Sarah M., Di Cristofaro, Natascja, King‐Dowling, Sara, Obeid, Joyce
Formato: research tables/charts Journal Article
Publicado: Wiley-Blackwell Jul2025
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=187022029&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 187022029
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        03051862
        6NX
      jtl: Child: Care, Health & Development
      issn: 03051862
      maglogo: Y
    pubinfo:
      dt: Jul2025
      vid: 51
      iid: 4
      pid: 480
      pub: Wiley-Blackwell
      place: Malden, Massachusetts
    artinfo:
      ui:
        187022029
        187022029
        187022029
        10.1111/cch.70133
        187022029
      ppf: 1
      ppct: 11
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: C
          – @attributes:
              type: P
      tig:
        atl: Beyond the (Log)book: Comparing Accelerometer Nonwear Detection Techniques in Toddlers.
      aug:
        au:
          Letts, Elyse
          da Silva, Sarah M.
          Di Cristofaro, Natascja
          King‐Dowling, Sara
          Obeid, Joyce
        affil: Child Health & Exercise Medicine Program, Department of Pediatrics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
      sug:
        subj:
          Accelerometers In Infancy and Childhood
          Wearable Sensors In Infancy and Childhood
          Automation
          Algorithms
          Parents
          Self Report
          Diaries
          Physical Activity Evaluation
          Sedentary Behavior Evaluation
          Human
          Funding Source
          Comparative Studies
          Child, Preschool
          Actigraphy
          Hip
          Descriptive Statistics
          Sleep
          Child, Preschool: 2-5 years
      ab: Background: Accelerometers are increasingly used to measure physical activity and sedentary time in toddlers. Data cleaning or wear time validation can impact outcomes of interest, particularly in young children who spend less time awake. However, no study has systematically compared wear time validation strategies in toddlers. As such, the objective of this study is to compare different fully automated methods of distinguishing wear and nonwear time (counts and raw data algorithms) methods to the semi automated (counts with logbooks) criterion method in toddlers. Methods: We recruited 109 toddlers (age 12–35 months) as part of the iPLAY study to wear an ActiGraph w‐GT3X‐BT accelerometer on the right hip for ~7 consecutive days (removed for sleep and water activities). Parents completed a logbook to indicate monitor removal and nap times. We tested 15 nonwear detection methods grouped into four main categories: semi‐automated logbook, consecutive 0 counts, modified consecutive 0 counts (Troiano and Choi) and raw data methods (van Hees and Ahmadi). Using semi‐automated logbooks as the criterion standard (all wear and wake‐time only wear), we calculated the accuracy and F1 scores (a metric which balances precision and recall) and compared overall wear time with a two one‐sided test of equivalence. Results: Participant daily wear time ranged from 556 to 684 min/day depending on method. Accuracy and F1 score ranged from 86% to 95%. Five methods were considered equivalent to the AllWear nonwear criterion (true wear time including sleep‐time wear), with only one equivalent to the AwakeWear criterion. Mean absolute differences were lower for the AllWear criterion but ranged from 49 to 192 min/day. Conclusions: The 5min0count, 10min_0count, 30min_0count, Troiano60s and Ahmadi methods provide high accuracy and equivalency when compared with semi‐automated cleaning using logbooks. This paper provides insights and quantitative results that can help researchers decide which method may be the most appropriate given their population of interest, sample size and study protocol. SUMMARY: The choice of nonwear detection method can significantly change total wear time in toddlers.Nap times pose challenges when assessing wake‐time wear.The selection of a nonwear detection method may be dependent on the population of interest, sample size and study protocol.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        research
        tables/charts
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N