Abstract PURPOSE: Physical activity measured by accelerometry (PA-accelerometry) is used as an indicator of disease severity in chronic diseases. Currently, only fragmented age ranges of reference percentile curves are available for European children. This study aimed to provide age- and sex-specific percentiles for physical activity measured by hip-worn accelerometry derived throughout the full age range of European children. METHODS: Individual-level population-based PA data from HELENA and IDEFICS/I.Family studies were pooled and harmonized. Together these studies involved children aged 2–18 years from 12 European countries. PA was measured using uni-axial or tri-axial Actigraph accelerometers. Accelerometry recording was defined as valid if lasted at least 6 hours on at least 2 weekdays and 1 weekend day. Primary outcomes included averaged counts per minute (CPM), sedentary time (SED), light PA (LPA) and moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA). Generalized Additive Models for Location, Scale and Shape were used to derive age- and sex-specific reference percentile curves for these outcomes. RESULTS: The combined cohort consisted of 11,645 children aged 2 to 18 years who contributed 14,610 valid accelerometry recordings, with a median accelerometer wear time of 6 days and a median wear time of 745 minutes per day. This dataset allowed for the construction of age- and sex-specific reference percentile curves for CPM, SED, LPA, and MVPA. The curves demonstrated varying trends and variability across age groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides age- and sex-specific percentile curves for PA-accelerometry in European children, addressing a current gap in the availability of full-age range reference data. These curves based on healthy children can be used by clinicians, researchers, and policymakers to interpret PA-accelerometry measurements, assess severity of disease in paediatric chronic illness, track physical activity trends, and evaluate treatment responses and health interventions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ploegstra et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: