Objective Monitoring of Physical Activity Using Motion Sensors and Heart Rate

By Patty S. Freedson, K. Miller. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 2000

516 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Recreation and Leisure Research from an Active Living Perspective: Taking a Second Look at Urban Trail Use Data (2005, background): “Health science researchers have refined observational measures and make regular use of objective instruments such as accelerometers to measure various aspects of physical activity (Freedson & Miller, 2000).”
Determining Measurement Error in Digital Pedometers (2003, methodology): “This inexpensive, objective monitor of daily physical activity is typically used as the dependent measure in studies on both adults and children (Bassett et al., 1996; Eston et al., 1998; Freedson & Miller, 2000; Kilanowski et al., 1999; Welk et al., 2000).”
Validity of the international physical activity questionnaire short form (IPAQ-SF): A systematic review (2011, background): “Movement sensors such as accelerometers have grown in popularity recently as a measure of physical activity [9], not only due to their objective measurements, but also due to their relatively small and unobtrusive size.”
International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. (2003, unknown): “6) 132 (63) — 15 (7)‡ — — — 199 72 (36) 46.”
How Many Steps/Day Are Enough? (2004, background): “[1]Of the two motion sensors, however, pedometers are generally considered the more practical alternative for individual and population health promotion efforts.[1,7,9]They are simple to use, affordable ($US15-30), and the output (e.”