[11] Oliver, M., Schofield, G.M., Badland, H.M. and Shepherd, J. (2010) Utility of accelerometer thresholds for classifying sitting in office workers. Preventive Medicine, 51, 357- 360. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2010.08.010

has been cited by the following article:

• TITLE: Counting Steps in Research: A Comparison of Accelerometry and Pedometry

  AUTHORS: Melody Oliver, Hannah M Badland, Janine Shepherd, Grant M Schofield

  KEYWORDS: Physical activity; Measurement; Pedometer; Inclinometer; Accelerometer; Validation; Reliability

  JOURNAL NAME: Open Journal of Preventive Medicine, Vol.1 No.1, May 25, 2011

  ABSTRACT: The objective of this study was to assess the validity of the step count functions in Actical accelerometers and activPAL inclinometers, compared with pedome-ter-derived step count data. Firstly, directly observed step counts over 3 treadmill speeds were compared with steps collected from 3 pedometers, accelerometers, and inclinometers in 10 adults. Secondly, step count data were derived from 22 participants who wore a pedome-ter, accelerometer, and inclinometer over 48 hours. Agreement between measurement tools was determined. All monitors appropriately measured steps in the labo-ratory conditions. In free living conditions, the mean percentage differences with pedometer-determined step counts were -7.3% and 7.0% for the Actical and ac-tivPAL monitors, respectively. With the exception of slow walking for the Actical units (ICC