↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of four sensor locations for physical activity assessment

Overview of attention for article published in Applied Ergonomics, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Readers on

mendeley
147 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Evaluation of four sensor locations for physical activity assessment
Published in
Applied Ergonomics, September 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.apergo.2015.09.007
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Direct measurements of physical activity (PA) obtained with inertial measurement units (IMUs) secured to the upper arms and trunk of 36 registered nurses working a full shift were compared to measurements obtained with a commercially-available PA monitor (ActiGraph wGT3X-BT) worn at the waist. Raw accelerations from each device were summarized into PA counts/min and metabolic equivalent (METs) categories using standard definitions. Differences between measurements were examined using repeated measures one-way analyses of variance (ANOVA) and agreement was assessed using Bland-Altman plots. Statistically significant differences were observed between all sensor locations for all PA summary metrics except for between the left and right arm for percentages of work time in the light and moderate counts/min categories. Bland-Altman plots suggested limited agreement between measurements obtained with the IMUs and measurements obtained with the wGT3X-BT waist-worn PA monitor. Results indicate that PA measurements vary substantially based on sensor location.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 147 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Italy 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 143 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 25%
Student > Master 26 18%
Researcher 11 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 5%
Student > Bachelor 8 5%
Other 30 20%
Unknown 27 18%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 31 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 9%
Sports and Recreations 10 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Other 23 16%
Unknown 42 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 May 2016.
All research outputs
#8,534,528
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Applied Ergonomics
#638
of 1,658 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,176
of 286,192 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Applied Ergonomics
#6
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,658 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 286,192 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.