↓ Skip to main content

Estimating relative intensity using individualized accelerometer cutpoints: the importance of fitness level

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 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.
Title
Estimating relative intensity using individualized accelerometer cutpoints: the importance of fitness level
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, April 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-13-53
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cemal Ozemek, Heather L Cochran, Scott J Strath, Wonwoo Byun, Leonard A Kaminsky

Abstract

Accelerometer cutpoints based on absolute intensity may under or overestimate levels of physical activity due to the lack of consideration for an individual's current fitness level. The purpose of this study was to illustrate the interindividual variability in accelerometer activity counts measured at relative intensities (40 and 60% heart rate reserve (HRR)) and demonstrate the differences between relative activity counts between low, moderate and high fitness groups.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 55 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 24%
Student > Master 12 20%
Researcher 11 19%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 3 5%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 6 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 14 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 22%
Psychology 5 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 7%
Other 11 19%
Unknown 8 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 02 April 2013.
All research outputs
#3,556,076
of 5,037,615 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#507
of 606 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,606
of 93,615 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#27
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,037,615 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 606 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 93,615 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.