↓ Skip to main content

Which activity monitor to use? Validity, reproducibility and user friendliness of three activity monitors

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
19 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Which activity monitor to use? Validity, reproducibility and user friendliness of three activity monitors
Published in
BMC Public Health, July 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-14-749
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brenda AJ Berendsen, Marike RC Hendriks, Kenneth Meijer, Guy Plasqui, Nicolaas C Schaper, Hans HCM Savelberg

Abstract

Health is associated with amount of daily physical activity. Recently, the identification of sedentary time as an independent factor, has gained interest. A valid and easy to use activity monitor is needed to objectively investigate the relationship between physical activity, sedentary time and health. We compared validity and reproducibility of physical activity measurement and posture identification of three activity monitors, as well as user friendliness.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 tweeters 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 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 3%
United States 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 110 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 29%
Student > Master 17 15%
Student > Bachelor 13 11%
Researcher 13 11%
Professor 6 5%
Other 23 20%
Unknown 10 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 17%
Sports and Recreations 18 16%
Social Sciences 7 6%
Engineering 7 6%
Other 24 21%
Unknown 16 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 28 February 2019.
All research outputs
#1,135,682
of 17,098,187 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#1,228
of 11,548 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,814
of 199,553 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,098,187 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,548 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
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 199,553 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them