↓ Skip to main content

Validity and practical utility of accelerometry for the measurement of in-hand physical activity in horses

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
51 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
Validity and practical utility of accelerometry for the measurement of in-hand physical activity in horses
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12917-015-0550-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

R. Morrison, D. G. M. Sutton, C. Ramsoy, N. Hunter-Blair, J. Carnwath, E. Horsfield, P. S. Yam

Abstract

Accelerometers are valid, practical and reliable tools for the measurement of habitual physical activity (PA). Quantification of PA in horses is desirable for use in research and clinical settings. The objective of this study was to evaluate a triaxial accelerometer for objective measurement of PA in the horse by assessment of their practical utility and validity. Horses were recruited to establish both the optimal site of accelerometer attachment and questionnaire designed to explore owner acceptance. Validity and cut-off values were obtained by assessing PA at various gaits. Validation study- 20 horses wore the accelerometer while being filmed for 10 min each of rest, walking and trotting and 5 mins of canter work. Practical utility study- five horses wore accelerometers on polls and withers for 18 h; compliance and relative data losses were quantified. Accelerometry output differed significantly between the four PA levels (P < 0•001) for both wither and poll placement. For withers placement, ROC analyses found optimal sensitivity and specificity at a cut-off of <47 counts per minute (cpm) for rest (sensitivity 99.5 %, specificity 100 %), 967-2424 cpm for trotting (sensitivity 96.7 %, specificity 100 %) and ≥2425 cpm for cantering (sensitivity 96.0 %, specificity 97.0 %). Attachment at the poll resulted in optimal sensitivity and specificity at a cut-off of <707 counts per minute (cpm) for rest (sensitivity 97.5 %, specificity 99.6 %), 1546-2609 cpm for trotting (sensitivity 90.33 %, specificity 79.25 %) and ≥2610 cpm for cantering (sensitivity 100 %, specificity 100 %) In terms of practical utility, accelerometry was well tolerated and owner acceptance high. Accelerometry data correlated well with varying levels of in-hand equine activity. The use of accelerometers is a valid method for objective measurement of controlled PA in the horse.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 50 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 18%
Student > Bachelor 7 14%
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Master 6 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Other 10 20%
Unknown 8 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 10 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 16%
Sports and Recreations 5 10%
Engineering 4 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 8%
Other 11 22%
Unknown 9 18%
Attention Score in Context

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 16 September 2015.
All research outputs
#18,616,159
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#1,732
of 3,087 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#183,603
of 270,330 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#33
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,087 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. 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 270,330 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.