Dalarna University's logo and link to the university's website

du.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • chicago-author-date
  • chicago-note-bibliography
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Concurrent and discriminant validity of ActiGraph waist and wrist cut-points to measure sedentary behaviour, activity level, and posture in office work
Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1697-9781
2021 (English)In: BMC Public Health, E-ISSN 1471-2458, Vol. 21, no 1Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: Sedentary Behaviour (SB) gets an increasing attention from ergonomics and public health due to its associated detrimental health effects. A large number of studies record SB with ActiGraph counts-per-minute cut-points, but we still lack valid information about what the cut-points tell us about office work. This study therefore analysed the concurrent and discriminant validity of commonly used cut-points to measure SB, activity level, and posture. Methods: Thirty office workers completed four office tasks at three workplaces (conventional chair, activity-promoting chair, and standing desk) while wearing two ActiGraphs (waist and wrist). Indirect calorimetry and prescribed posture served as reference criteria. Generalized Estimation Equations analysed workplace and task effects on the activity level and counts-per-minute, and kappa statistics and ROC curves analysed the cut-point validity. Results: The activity-promoting chair (p < 0.001, ES ≥ 0.66) but not the standing desk (p = 1.0) increased the activity level, and both these workplaces increased the waist (p ≤ 0.003, ES ≥ 0.63) but not the wrist counts-per-minute (p = 0.74) compared to the conventional chair. The concurrent and discriminant validity was higher for activity level (kappa: 0.52–0.56 and 0.38–0.45, respectively) than for SB and posture (kappa ≤0.35 and ≤ 0.19, respectively). Furthermore, the discriminant validity for activity level was higher for task effects (kappa: 0.42–0.48) than for workplace effects (0.13–0.24). Conclusions: ActiGraph counts-per-minute for waist and wrist placement were – independently of the chosen cut-point – a measure for activity level and not for SB or posture, and the cut-points performed better to detect task effects than workplace effects. Waist cut-points were most valid to measure the activity level in conventional seated office work, but they showed severe limitations for sit-stand desks. None of the placements was valid to detect the increased activity on the activity-promoting chair. Caution should therefore be paid when analysing the effect of workplace interventions on activity level with ActiGraph waist and wrist cut-points. © 2021, The Author(s).

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
BioMed Central Ltd , 2021. Vol. 21, no 1
Keywords [en]
Ergonomics; Humans; Posture; Sedentary Behavior; Sitting Position; Workplace; Wrist; body position; ergonomics; human; sitting; workplace; wrist
National Category
Public Health, Global Health and Social Medicine
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:du-51770DOI: 10.1186/s12889-021-10387-7Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85100954614OAI: oai:DiVA.org:du-51770DiVA, id: diva2:2014141
Available from: 2025-11-17 Created: 2025-11-17 Last updated: 2025-11-17Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Grooten, Wim

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Grooten, Wim
In the same journal
BMC Public Health
Public Health, Global Health and Social Medicine

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 22 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • chicago-author-date
  • chicago-note-bibliography
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf