SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Accelerometer Cut Points for Physical Activity Assessment of Older Adults with Parkinson's Disease.

PLoS One · 2015-09-02

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0135899PMID: 26332765

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Validation Study; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

ObjectiveTo define accelerometer cut points for different walking speeds in older adults with mild to moderate Parkinson's disease.MethodA volunteer sample of 30 older adults (mean age 73; SD 5.4 years) with mild to moderate Parkinson's disease walked at self-defined brisk, normal, and slow speeds for three minutes in a circular indoor hallway, each wearing an accelerometer around the waist. Walking speed was calculated and used as a reference measure. Through ROC analysis, accelerometer cut points for different levels of walking speed in counts per 15 seconds were generated, and a leave-one-out cross-validation was performed followed by a quadratic weighted Cohen's Kappa, to test the level of agreement between true and cut point-predicted walking speeds.ResultsOptimal cut points for walking speeds ≤ 1.0 m/s were ≤ 328 and ≤ 470 counts/15 sec; for speeds > 1.3 m/s, they were ≥ 730 and ≥ 851 counts/15 sec for the vertical axis and vector magnitude, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity were 61%-100% for the developed cut points. The quadratic weighted Kappa showed substantial agreement: κ = 0.79 (95% CI 0.70-0.89) and κ = 0.69 (95% CI 0.56-0.82) for the vertical axis and the vector magnitude, respectively.ConclusionsThis study provides accelerometer cut points based on walking speed for physical-activity measurement in older adults with Parkinson's disease for evaluation of interventions and for investigating links between physical activity and health.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.