Skip to main content
. 2022 Mar 13;32(6):971–983. doi: 10.1111/sms.14147

TABLE 3.

Comparison between sedentary time (SED) and physical activity (PA) calculated from different cut‐points (N = 751)

Difference

(min/d)

LOA

MAPE

(%)

LCCC
Mean a (95% CI) SD
SED
VACountsEvenson vs. ENMOHildebrand −319 (−322 to −315) 45.6 −408 to −229 44.8 0.02
VACountsEvenson vs. VMCountsButte 22 (20 to 24) 29.5 −36 to 80 8.7 0.76
VMCountsButte vs. ENMOHildebrand −341 (−344 to −338) 46.2 −431 to −250 48.0 0.03
Light PA
VACountsEvenson vs. ENMOHildebrand 205 (203 to 207) 30.2 145 to 264 173.9 0.02
VACountsEvenson vs. VMCountsButte −52 (−54 to −50) 22.7 −97 to −8 13.6 0.43
VMCountsButte vs. ENMOHildebrand 257 (254 to 259) 36.1 186 to 327 217.3 0.01
Moderate PA
VACountsEvenson vs. ENMOHildebrand 18 (17 to 19) 12.0 −5 to 42 62.9 0.28
VACountsEvenson vs. VMCountsButte 5 (5 to 6) 8.8 −12 to 23 24.5 0.82
VMCountsButte vs. ENMOHildebrand 13 (12 to 14) 14.5 −16 to 41 47.8 0.40
Vigorous PA
VACountsEvenson vs. ENMOHildebrand 17 (16 to 17) 8.1 1 to 32 786.3 0.08
VACountsEvenson vs. VMCountsButte 7 (7 to 8) 3.9 −0 to 15 413.3 0.68
VMCountsButte vs. ENMOHildebrand 9 (9 to 10) 7.4 −5 to 24 89.3 0.15
MVPA
VACountsEvenson vs. ENMOHildebrand 35 (34 to 36) 16.3 3 to 67 102.3 0.21
VACountsEvenson vs. VMCountsButte 13 (12 to 13) 9.8 −6 to 32 64.0 0.79
VMCountsButte vs. ENMOHildebrand 22 (21 to 23) 18.0 −13 to 57 31.1 0.35

Data are presented as mean differences, 95% confident interval (CI), and standard deviation (SD) as well as limits of agreement (LOA), mean absolute percent error (MAPE), and Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (LCCC). Cut‐points expressed with the acceleration metric used; Evenson et al. 11 , Hildebrand et al. 13 , 14 , and Butte et al. 10 .

Abbreviations: ENMO, Euclidean norm −1 g; MVPA, Moderate‐to‐vigorous physical activity; VACounts, Vertical axis counts; VMCounts, Vector magnitude counts.

a

Based on paired‐samples t‐test, all mean differences were p ≤ 0.001.