Evidence mapPaperPMID 42393793Full record

ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2026

Determination of cut-off points for the Move4 accelerometer and assessment of energy expenditure in children and adolescents aged 6-16 years using manual wheelchairs: a validation and calibration study.

Selina Seemüller, Anne Kerstin Reimers, Benedikt Meixner, Florian Engel, Franziska Beck

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Selina SeemüllerDepartment of Sport Science and Sport, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany. Selina.seemueller@fau.de.
Anne Kerstin ReimersDepartment of Sport Science and Sport, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Benedikt MeixnerDepartment of Sport Science and Sport, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Florian EngelIntegrative and Experimental Exercise Science & Training, Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Franziska BeckDepartment of Sport Science and Sport, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe present study aimed to determine activity intensity and validate the Move4 accelerometer and derive cut-off points to accurately classify wheelchair-based physical activity (PA) in children and adolescents.

methodsA calibration and validation study with a test-retest design was performed in 24 children and adolescents (mean age 9.9 ± 3.2 years; 50% girls) using manual wheelchairs. Participants used a manual wheelchair as their primary mode of mobility and were able propelling the wheelchair independently. Participants completed standardized activities while wearing Move4 sensors at the wrist, upper arm, and chest. In a subsample of 7 children and adolescents, energy expenditure was recorded using portable metabolic cart. Mean Amplitude Deviation (MAD) and Movement Acceleration Intensity (MAI) were processed to derive cut-off points for sedentary, light, moderate, and vigorous PA using CART models, and validity was assessed via Metabolic Equivalent (MET) and heart-rate responses.

resultsBoth MAD and MAI values increased systematically across activity intensities, supporting good criterion validity. MET values showed progression from sedentary to vigorous tasks. Intensity-specific cut-off points were successfully established for all sensor placements, with consistently higher thresholds for MAI. Sensitivity and specificity analyses indicated the most balanced performance for the upper arm (MAD) and chest (MAI). Test-retest comparisons showed greater variability for MAD-based cut-offs, whereas MAI thresholds demonstrated higher stability, with deviations of approximately 4-5%.

conclusionsWhile both MAD and MAI validly reflected PA intensity, MAI showed greater temporal stability and test-retest robustness. These findings support the use of accelerometery for classifying PA in children and adolescents using wheelchairs and underscore the importance of selecting appropriate metrics and sensor positions.

Indexed as

AccelerometryEnergy MetabolismWheelchairsAdolescentCalibrationChildFemaleHumansMaleReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID42393793
PMCPMC13330353

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.