Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-18 @ 8:27 AM
Ignite Modification Date:
2025-12-23 @ 10:51 PM
Study NCT ID:
NCT04173715
Status:
None
Last Update Posted:
2024-05-08 00:00:00
First Post:
2019-10-31 00:00:00
Is Possible Gene Therapy:
False
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Movement and Behaviours Measurement Study
Sponsor:
None
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Validation of Cut-points to Estimate Sedentary Time and Physical Activity Intensities in Older Adults
Status:
None
Status Verified Date:
2024-05
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
MOBEMENTS
Brief Summary:
Knowledge on health implications of sedentary time and physical activity has been substantially improved in the last decades with accelerometer-based estimations. The popularity of these devices is partially explained by the capacity of objectively recording physical behaviors (e.g., sleep, sedentary time, physical activity…) during the whole day. The so-called "cut-point" approach is behind most of the research on physical activity with accelerometers. Cut-points provide metrics that are easy to understand, to translate to the public and to replicate by researchers in different settings. Usually, the minimum requirement is to use cut-points adapted to the age-group of the population of interest.
Under this paradigm, cut-points have been developed in all age-groups and with a variate set to data collection and processing protocols. However, some scenarios lack of available cut-points to implement, being older adults (\> 65 years) the population with less alternatives of cut-points to use. In this sense, studies with older adults choose cut-points developed in younger adults to classify physical activity intensities. Biomechanical and physiological differences between adults and older adults advise against using this strategy. Therefore, relative energy expenditure and functional status should be considered for future cut-points design. Moreover, must be also awarded that hardly any previous cut-points validation protocols have been performed in a free-living setting. For this reason, more studies following these designs seems necessary to improve cut-points population's validity. Missing all mentioned factors could lead to physical activity and sedentary behavior patterns misclassification in this population.
Under this paradigm, cut-points have been developed in all age-groups and with a variate set to data collection and processing protocols. However, some scenarios lack of available cut-points to implement, being older adults (\> 65 years) the population with less alternatives of cut-points to use. In this sense, studies with older adults choose cut-points developed in younger adults to classify physical activity intensities. Biomechanical and physiological differences between adults and older adults advise against using this strategy. Therefore, relative energy expenditure and functional status should be considered for future cut-points design. Moreover, must be also awarded that hardly any previous cut-points validation protocols have been performed in a free-living setting. For this reason, more studies following these designs seems necessary to improve cut-points population's validity. Missing all mentioned factors could lead to physical activity and sedentary behavior patterns misclassification in this population.
Detailed Description:
None
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
None
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
None
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
None
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: