Comparing the standards of one metabolic equivalent of task in accurately estimating physical activity energy expenditure based on acceleration

The purpose of the study is to analyse how the standard of resting metabolic rate (RMR) affects estimation of the metabolic equivalent of task (MET) using an accelerometer. In order to investigate the effect on estimation according to intensity of activity, comparisons were conducted between the 3.5...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of sports sciences 2017-07, Vol.35 (13), p.1279-1286
Main Authors: Kim, Dohyun, Lee, Jongshill, Park, Hoon Ki, Jang, Dong Pyo, Song, Soohwa, Cho, Baek Hwan, Jung, Yoo-Suk, Park, Rae-Woong, Joo, Nam-Seok, Kim, In Young
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Acceleration
accelerometer
Accelerometry
Adult
Calorimetry, Indirect
Energy Metabolism - physiology
Exercise - physiology
Female
Humans
Male
Metabolic Equivalent
metabolic equivalent of task
physical activity energy expenditure
resting metabolic rate
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The purpose of the study is to analyse how the standard of resting metabolic rate (RMR) affects estimation of the metabolic equivalent of task (MET) using an accelerometer. In order to investigate the effect on estimation according to intensity of activity, comparisons were conducted between the 3.5 ml O 2  · kg −1  · min −1 and individually measured resting VO 2 as the standard of 1 MET. MET was estimated by linear regression equations that were derived through five-fold cross-validation using 2 types of MET values and accelerations; the accuracy of estimation was analysed through cross-validation, Bland and Altman plot, and one-way ANOVA test. There were no significant differences in the RMS error after cross-validation. However, the individual RMR-based estimations had as many as 0.5 METs of mean difference in modified Bland and Altman plots than RMR of 3.5 ml O 2  · kg −1  · min −1 . Finally, the results of an ANOVA test indicated that the individual RMR-based estimations had less significant differences between the reference and estimated values at each intensity of activity. In conclusion, the RMR standard is a factor that affects accurate estimation of METs by acceleration; therefore, RMR requires individual specification when it is used for estimation of METs using an accelerometer.
ISSN:0264-0414
1466-447X
DOI:10.1080/02640414.2016.1221520