Reliability and validity of ten consumer activity trackers

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background

Activity trackers can potentially stimulate users to increase their physical activity behavior. The aim of this study was to examine the reliability and validity of ten consumer activity trackers for measuring step count in both laboratory and free-living conditions.

Method

Healthy adult volunteers ( n = 33) walked twice on a treadmill (4.8 km/h) for 30 min while wearing ten different activity trackers (i.e. Lumoback, Fitbit Flex, Jawbone Up, Nike+ Fuelband SE, Misfit Shine, Withings Pulse, Fitbit Zip, Omron HJ-203, Yamax Digiwalker SW-200 and Moves mobile application). In free-living conditions, 56 volunteers wore the same activity trackers for one working day. Test-retest reliability was analyzed with the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). Validity was evaluated by comparing each tracker with the gold standard (Optogait system for laboratory and ActivPAL for free-living conditions), using paired samples t-tests, mean absolute percentage errors, correlations and Bland-Altman plots.

Results

Test-retest analysis revealed high reliability for most trackers except for the Omron (ICC .14), Moves app (ICC .37) and Nike+ Fuelband (ICC .53). The mean absolute percentage errors of the trackers in laboratory and free-living conditions respectively, were: Lumoback (−0.2, −0.4), Fibit Flex (−5.7, 3.7), Jawbone Up (−1.0, 1.4), Nike+ Fuelband (−18, −24), Misfit Shine (0.2, 1.1), Withings Pulse (−0.5, −7.9), Fitbit Zip (−0.3, 1.2), Omron (2.5, −0.4), Digiwalker (−1.2, −5.9), and Moves app (9.6, −37.6). Bland-Altman plots demonstrated that the limits of agreement varied from 46 steps (Fitbit Zip) to 2422 steps (Nike+ Fuelband) in the laboratory condition, and 866 steps (Fitbit Zip) to 5150 steps (Moves app) in the free-living condition.

Conclusion

The reliability and validity of most trackers for measuring step count is good. The Fitbit Zip is the most valid whereas the reliability and validity of the Nike+ Fuelband is low.

Related collections

Most cited references 22

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

The validity of consumer-level, activity monitors in healthy adults worn in free-living conditions: a cross-sectional study

Ty Ferguson, Alex V Rowlands, Tim Olds … (2015)

Background Technological advances have seen a burgeoning industry for accelerometer-based wearable activity monitors targeted at the consumer market. The purpose of this study was to determine the convergent validity of a selection of consumer-level accelerometer-based activity monitors. Methods 21 healthy adults wore seven consumer-level activity monitors (Fitbit One, Fitbit Zip, Jawbone UP, Misfit Shine, Nike Fuelband, Striiv Smart Pedometer and Withings Pulse) and two research-grade accelerometers/multi-sensor devices (BodyMedia SenseWear, and ActiGraph GT3X+) for 48-hours. Participants went about their daily life in free-living conditions during data collection. The validity of the consumer-level activity monitors relative to the research devices for step count, moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA), sleep and total daily energy expenditure (TDEE) was quantified using Bland-Altman analysis, median absolute difference and Pearson’s correlation. Results All consumer-level activity monitors correlated strongly (r > 0.8) with research-grade devices for step count and sleep time, but only moderately-to-strongly for TDEE (r = 0.74-0.81) and MVPA (r = 0.52-0.91). Median absolute differences were generally modest for sleep and steps (<10% of research device mean values for the majority of devices) moderate for TDEE (<30% of research device mean values), and large for MVPA (26-298%). Across the constructs examined, the Fitbit One, Fitbit Zip and Withings Pulse performed most strongly. Conclusions In free-living conditions, the consumer-level activity monitors showed strong validity for the measurement of steps and sleep duration, and moderate valid for measurement of TDEE and MVPA. Validity for each construct ranged widely between devices, with the Fitbit One, Fitbit Zip and Withings Pulse being the strongest performers.

0 comments Cited 191 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

The validity and reliability of a novel activity monitor as a measure of walking.

C. Ryan, P Grant, W W Tigbe … (2006)

The accurate measurement of physical activity is crucial to understanding the relationship between physical activity and disease prevention and treatment. The primary purpose of this study was to investigate the validity and reliability of the activPAL physical activity monitor in measuring step number and cadence. The ability of the activPAL monitor to measure step number and cadence in 20 healthy adults (age 34.5+/-6.9 years; BMI 26.8+/-4.8 (mean+/-SD)) was evaluated against video observation. Concurrently, the accuracy of two commonly used pedometers, the Yamax Digi-Walker SW-200 and the Omron HJ-109-E, was compared to observation for measuring step number. Participants walked on a treadmill at five different speeds (0.90, 1.12, 1.33, 1.56, and 1.78 m/s) and outdoors at three self selected speeds (slow, normal, and fast). At all speeds, inter device reliability was excellent for the activPAL (ICC (2,1)> or =0.99) for both step number and cadence. The absolute percentage error for the activPAL was <1.11% for step number and cadence regardless of walking speed. The accuracy of the pedometers was adversely affected by slow walking speeds. The activPAL monitor is a valid and reliable measure of walking in healthy adults. Its accuracy is not influenced by walking speed. The activPAL may be a useful device in sports medicine.

0 comments Cited 144 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Validity of consumer-based physical activity monitors.

Gregory J Welk, Jung-Eun Lee, Youngwon Kim (2014)

Many consumer-based monitors are marketed to provide personal information on the levels of physical activity and daily energy expenditure (EE), but little or no information is available to substantiate their validity. This study aimed to examine the validity of EE estimates from a variety of consumer-based, physical activity monitors under free-living conditions. Sixty (26.4 ± 5.7 yr) healthy males (n = 30) and females (n = 30) wore eight different types of activity monitors simultaneously while completing a 69-min protocol. The monitors included the BodyMedia FIT armband worn on the left arm, the DirectLife monitor around the neck, the Fitbit One, the Fitbit Zip, and the ActiGraph worn on the belt, as well as the Jawbone Up and Basis B1 Band monitor on the wrist. The validity of the EE estimates from each monitor was evaluated relative to criterion values concurrently obtained from a portable metabolic system (i.e., Oxycon Mobile). Differences from criterion measures were expressed as a mean absolute percent error and were evaluated using 95% equivalence testing. For overall group comparisons, the mean absolute percent error values (computed as the average absolute value of the group-level errors) were 9.3%, 10.1%, 10.4%, 12.2%, 12.6%, 12.8%, 13.0%, and 23.5% for the BodyMedia FIT, Fitbit Zip, Fitbit One, Jawbone Up, ActiGraph, DirectLife, NikeFuel Band, and Basis B1 Band, respectively. The results from the equivalence testing showed that the estimates from the BodyMedia FIT, Fitbit Zip, and NikeFuel Band (90% confidence interval = 341.1-359.4) were each within the 10% equivalence zone around the indirect calorimetry estimate. The indicators of the agreement clearly favored the BodyMedia FIT armband, but promising preliminary findings were also observed with the Fitbit Zip.

0 comments Cited 132 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

Thea J. M. Kooiman: t.j.m.kooiman@pl.hanze.nl

Manon L. Dontje: m.l.dontje@alumnus.rug.nl

Siska R. Sprenger: s.r.sprenger@pl.hanze.nl

Wim P. Krijnen: w.p.krijnen@pl.hanze.nl

Cees P. van der Schans: c.p.van.der.schans@pl.hanze.nl

Martijn de Groot: ma.degroot@pl.hanze.nl

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil

Title: BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation

Publisher: BioMed Central (London )

ISSN (Electronic): 2052-1847

Publication date (Electronic): 12 October 2015

Publication date PMC-release: 12 October 2015

Publication date Collection: 2015

Volume: 7

Electronic Location Identifier: 24

Affiliations

[ ]Research group Healthy ageing, Allied health care and Nursing, Hanze University of Applied Sciences, Groningen, The Netherlands

[ ]CBO Groningen: Center for Physical Activity and Research, Groningen, The Netherlands

[ ]Quantified Self Institute, Hanze University of Applied Sciences, Groningen, The Netherlands

Article

Publisher ID: 18

DOI: 10.1186/s13102-015-0018-5

PMC ID: 4603296

PubMed ID: 26464801

SO-VID: 5135875b-4345-455b-a3c5-5264cf6c0be5

License:

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

History

Date received : 28 April 2015

Date accepted : 5 October 2015

Custom metadata

Keywords: accelerometry,activity trackers,validation study,reliability,free-living

Data availability:

Keywords: accelerometry, activity trackers, validation study, reliability, free-living

Reliability and validity of ten consumer activity trackers

Read this article at

Abstract

Background

Method

Results

Conclusion

Related collections

Fandom activity

Most cited references 22

The validity of consumer-level, activity monitors in healthy adults worn in free-living conditions: a cross-sectional study

The validity and reliability of a novel activity monitor as a measure of walking.

Validity of consumer-based physical activity monitors.

Author and article information

Contributors

Journal

Affiliations

Article

History

Categories

Custom metadata

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 128

Cited by 147

Most referenced authors 937