Validation of accelerometer placement to capture energy expenditure using doubly labeled water
Ryan J. Dougherty, Fangyu Liu, Lacey Etzkorn, Amal A. Wanigatunga, Peter J. Walter, Nicolas D. Knuth, Jennifer A. Schrack, Luigi Ferrucci
Abstract
Ryan J. Dougherty, Fangyu Liu, Lacey Etzkorn, Amal A. Wanigatunga, Peter J. Walter, Nicolas D. Knuth, Jennifer A. Schrack, Luigi Ferrucci
Abstract
This study compared accelerometer-measured physical activity by body placement to daily total energy expenditure (TEE) and activity energy expenditure (AEE) measured using doubly labeled water (DLW). Forty-nine adult participants wore accelerometers placed on the nondominant wrist, dominant wrist, and chest while also undergoing DLW assessments. In adjusted models, wrist-measured physical activity ( p < 0.05), but not chest-measured physical activity ( p > 0.05), was associated with TEE and AEE and explained a significant amount of variance that was not explained by age, sex, height, or body composition ( R2 change = 0.04–0.08; all p < 0.05). Accelerometer placement location is an important consideration when using accelerometry to provide information about energy expenditure.
OpenAlex reports 4 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This study compared accelerometer-measured physical activity by body placement to daily total energy expenditure (TEE) and activity energy expenditure (AEE) measured using doubly labeled water (DLW). Forty-nine adult participants wore accelerometers placed on the nondominant wrist, dominant wrist, and chest while also undergoing DLW assessments. In adjusted models, wrist-measured physical activity ( p < 0.05), but not chest-measured physical activity ( p > 0.05), was associated with TEE and AEE and explained a significant amount of variance that was not explained by age, sex, height, or body composition ( R2 change = 0.04–0.08; all p < 0.05). Accelerometer placement location is an important consideration when using accelerometry to provide information about energy expenditure.
Key concepts: Doubly labeled water, Accelerometer, Energy expenditure, Physical activity, Wrist, Medicine, Total energy expenditure, Physical therapy