↓ Skip to main content

Impact of accelerometer data processing decisions on the sample size, wear time and physical activity level of a large cohort study

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
119 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
190 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
Impact of accelerometer data processing decisions on the sample size, wear time and physical activity level of a large cohort study
Published in
BMC Public Health, November 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-14-1210
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah Kozey Keadle, Eric J Shiroma, Patty S Freedson, I-Min Lee

Abstract

Accelerometers objectively assess physical activity (PA) and are currently used in several large-scale epidemiological studies, but there is no consensus for processing the data. This study compared the impact of wear-time assessment methods and using either vertical (V)-axis or vector magnitude (VM) cut-points on accelerometer output.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 190 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 2 1%
Canada 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Unknown 184 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 41 22%
Student > Master 32 17%
Researcher 23 12%
Student > Bachelor 15 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 6%
Other 29 15%
Unknown 39 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 21%
Sports and Recreations 33 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 7%
Engineering 10 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 5%
Other 33 17%
Unknown 52 27%
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 17 March 2019.
All research outputs
#13,183,581
of 22,771,140 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#9,264
of 14,843 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#174,309
of 361,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#139
of 224 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,771,140 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,843 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 361,950 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 224 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.