Literature DB >> 27887786

Validity and reliability of Fitbit activity monitors compared to ActiGraph GT3X+ with female adults in a free-living environment.

Ryan E R Reid1, Jessica A Insogna2, Tamara E Carver2, Andrea M Comptour2, Nicole A Bewski2, Cristina Sciortino2, Ross E Andersen2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Inexpensive activity monitors have recently gained popularity with the general public. Researchers have evaluated these consumer-based monitors in laboratory-conditions. Given the current wide-spread consumer use of these devices, it is important to ensure users are attaining accurate information compared to previously validated measures. This study investigates the accuracy of Fitbit One and Flex activity monitors in measuring steps, sedentary time, and time spent in light, moderate, and vigorous intensity activities with ActiGraph GT3X+ with female adults in free-living conditions.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.
METHODS: Twenty-two women, 21.23±1.63 years, BMI: 22.35±2.34kg/m2 wore two Fitbit Ones (bra and waist), one Fitbit Flex on the wrist, and one ActiGraph GT3X+ on the waist for seven-consecutive days. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to explore differences in steps, sedentary time, and time spent in light, moderate and vigorous intensity activities among the four devices.
RESULTS: No differences were found in number of steps recorded across the four devices. Fitbit One, waist and bra, overestimated time spent in light intensity activities. Fitbit One (waist) and Fitbit Flex overestimated time spent in moderate intensity activities. Fitbit One, waist and bra, and Fitbit Flex overestimated time spent in vigorous intensity activities. All Fitbit activity monitors overestimated MVPA and underestimated sedentary time compared to the ActiGraph.
CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of wear-location all Fitbit devices provide similar activity monitoring and users can wear the devices wherever best accommodates their lifestyle or needs. Users should not rely solely on these monitors when tracking vigorous and MVPA activities.
Copyright © 2016 Sports Medicine Australia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Fitbit; Physical activity; Reliability; Sedentary behavior; Validation

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27887786     DOI: 10.1016/j.jsams.2016.10.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Sci Med Sport        ISSN: 1878-1861            Impact factor:   4.319


  36 in total

1.  Feasibility of a telephone and web-based physical activity intervention for women shift workers.

Authors:  S E Neil-Sztramko; C C Gotay; C M Sabiston; P A Demers; K C Campbell
Journal:  Transl Behav Med       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 3.046

Review 2.  Use of Physical Activity Monitors in Rheumatic Populations.

Authors:  Christine A Pellegrini; Sara M Powell; Nicholas Mook; Katherine DeVivo; Linda Ehrlich-Jones
Journal:  Curr Rheumatol Rep       Date:  2018-10-06       Impact factor: 4.592

3.  The Influence of Daily Stress on Sedentary Behavior: Group and Person (N of 1) Level Results of a 1-Year Observational Study.

Authors:  Keith M Diaz; Anusorn Thanataveerat; Faith E Parsons; Sunmoo Yoon; Ying Kuen Cheung; Carmela Alcántara; Andrea T Duran; Ipek Ensari; David J Krupka; Joseph E Schwartz; Matthew M Burg; Karina W Davidson
Journal:  Psychosom Med       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 4.312

4.  An interpretable health behavioral intervention policy for mobile device users.

Authors:  X Hu; P-Y S Hsueh; C-H Chen; K M Diaz; F E Parsons; I Ensari; M Qian; Y-K K Cheung
Journal:  IBM J Res Dev       Date:  2018-01-25       Impact factor: 1.889

Review 5.  Objective Measurement of Walking Activity Using Wearable Technologies in People with Parkinson Disease: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Mathias Baptiste Correno; Clint Hansen; Thomas Carlin; Nicolas Vuillerme
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-16       Impact factor: 3.847

6.  VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF THE FITBIT FLEX™ AND ACTIGRAPH GT3X+ AT JOGGING AND RUNNING SPEEDS.

Authors:  Denise Jones; Kay Crossley; Ben Dascombe; Harvi F Hart; Joanne Kemp
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2018-08

7.  Monitoring the recovery time of children after tonsillectomy using commercial activity trackers.

Authors:  Philip Lambrechtse; Victoria C Ziesenitz; Andrew Atkinson; Ernst Jan Bos; Tatjana Welzel; Yael Gilgen; Nicolas Gürtler; Simone Heuscher; Adam Frederik Cohen; Johannes N van den Anker
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  2021-01-04       Impact factor: 3.183

8.  Getting Active Mindfully: Rationale and Case Illustration of a Group Mind-body and Activity Program for Chronic Pain.

Authors:  Jonathan Greenberg; Ann Lin; Paula J Popok; Ronald J Kulich; Robert R Edwards; Ana-Maria Vranceanu
Journal:  J Clin Psychol Med Settings       Date:  2021-01-19

9.  Physical activity patterns, adherence to using a wearable activity tracker during a 12-week period and correlation between self-reported function and physical activity in working age individuals with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Elin Östlind; Anita Sant'Anna; Frida Eek; Kjerstin Stigmar; Eva Ekvall Hansson
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2021-05-15       Impact factor: 2.362

10.  Comprehensive comparison of Apple Watch and Fitbit monitors in a free-living setting.

Authors:  Yang Bai; Connie Tompkins; Nancy Gell; Dakota Dione; Tao Zhang; Wonwoo Byun
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-05-26       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.