ArticleScientific reports2026
Evaluation of a thigh-worn accelerometer for detecting leg fidgeting and estimating its energetic cost via indirect calorimetry.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Leg fidgeting, characterised by rhythmic lower limb movement while seated, is a spontaneous, low-intensity behaviour that may serve as a practical strategy to interrupt prolonged sedentary time. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of detecting leg fidgeting using a wearable thigh-mounted accelerometer, and to quantify its energetic cost in comparison to sitting, standing, and slow walking under controlled settings. Fifteen healthy adults (mean age = 35.6 ± 12 years; 33.3% male) completed five-minute bouts of sitting, fidgeting, standing, and slow walking while wearing a thigh-mounted accelerometer (SENS motion system). Behaviour classification was validated against direct observation, and energy expenditure was measured using breath-by-breath indirect calorimetry. The SENS classification of fidgeting was evaluated using sensitivity, specificity, and balanced accuracy metrics. Energy expenditure was compared across activities using linear mixed-effects models, controlling for age, gender, and BMI. A total of 305 min of activity data were recorded. Balanced accuracy for activity classification ranged from 90.6% (slow walking) to 99.1% (standing), with fidgeting classified at 95.0%. The energy expenditure of fidgeting (mean = 1.69 kcal/min) was significantly different from sitting (1.49 kcal/min), standing (1.47 kcal/min), and slow walking (mean = 4.10 kcal/min). This study demonstrates that leg fidgeting can be detected using wearable sensors under controlled conditions. Furthermore, leg fidgeting expends slightly greater energy expenditure compared to sitting and standing. Future research should examine its metabolic relevance in free-living settings and explore its role in daily movement patterns and in strategies to reduce prolonged sedentary time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.