Arora et al. (2016): No evidence to support a ‘first night effect’ for wrist actigraphy in adolescent sample. The first night data should not be disregarded in future studies.
Boddy et al. (2019): Comparibility between wrist- and waist-worn accelerometer.
- Agreement was examined using Croncach’s Alpha, interclass correlation coefficients (ICC), limits of agreement (LOA), Kappa values, percent agreement, mean absolute percent error (MAPE), and equivalency analysis.
- wrist-based estimated of sedentary time generated using the 34 mg threshold are comparable with those derived from the accelerometer waist mounted 100 count/minute at the group level.
Chandler et al. (2018)
- 167 children ages 5-11 years wear accelerometers on both wrists. The optimal cut-point threshold for the non-dominant wrist was 203 counts/5 s with sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) of 71.56, 70.83, and 0.72, respectively.
- This study support the recommendation to place accelerometers on the non-dominant wrist to minimize “noise” during seated sedentary behaviors.
Dieu et al. (2016)
- No significant differences in physical activity when comparing the dominant vs non-dominant wrist when wearing accelerometer, regardless of axis.
- Mean daily accelerometer output data from both wrist were strongly correlated with average counts per minute from the ActiGraph worn around the waist (r= 0.88, P<0.001)
Fitria Dwi Andriyani 