Literature DB >> 32329355

Who Uses Wearable Activity Trackers and Why? A Comparison of Former and Current Users in the United States.

Ciarán P Friel1,2, Carol Ewing Garber1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There has been an explosion in the use of wearable activity trackers (WATs), but we do not fully understand who wears them and why. This study's purpose was to describe the characteristics of WAT users and to compare current and former users.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A variety of internet-based resources (eg, Craigslist, Facebook) were used to recruit current and former WAT users. Respondents completed a web-based survey, where they provided information on sociodemographic characteristics, health, physical activity behavior, and about their WAT use.
RESULTS: Of the 2826 respondents who gave informed consent, 70.8% (n = 2002) met inclusion criteria for this analysis. Respondents ranged from 18 to 81 years old (mean 32.9 ± 12.2 standard deviation) with 73.8% women. Most were current WAT users (68.7%), and the average length of WAT use overall was 9.3 ± 9.7 months. On average, current users wore the device for 3.7 months longer than former users. Compared to current users, former users had a lower body mass index (1.2 kg/m2 less), reported fewer medical conditions, shared data from their device less often, and received the device as a gift more frequently.
CONCLUSIONS: Current and former users varied in their reasons for using a WAT and how they used their device. Differences identified between these groups support further exploration of associations between WAT users' profiles and their physical activity behavior.

Entities:  

Keywords:  activity trackers; physical activity; sociodemographics; technology; wearables

Year:  2020        PMID: 32329355     DOI: 10.1177/0890117120919366

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Health Promot        ISSN: 0890-1171


  6 in total

1.  Stress, physical activity, and screen-related sedentary behaviour within the first month of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Authors:  Sarah J Woodruff; Paige Coyne; Emily St-Pierre
Journal:  Appl Psychol Health Well Being       Date:  2021-03-01

2.  Effectiveness of an 8-Week Physical Activity Intervention Involving Wearable Activity Trackers and an eHealth App: Mixed Methods Study.

Authors:  Gavin R McCormack; Jennie Petersen; Dalia Ghoneim; Anita Blackstaffe; Calli Naish; Patricia K Doyle-Baker
Journal:  JMIR Form Res       Date:  2022-05-03

3.  What drives the use of wearable healthcare devices? A cross-country comparison between the US and Korea.

Authors:  Jong-Youn Rha; Youngwon Nam; Sun Young Ahn; Jihye Kim; Youchung Chang; Jisu Jang; Keiko Kurita; Jin-Young Park; Kunsun Eom; Hyunseok Moon; Myoung Hoon Jung; Yoon Jae Kim; Jeong-Eun Hwang; HyucK Choo
Journal:  Digit Health       Date:  2022-08-17

4.  Experiences of activity monitoring and perceptions of digital support among working individuals with hip and knee osteoarthritis - a focus group study.

Authors:  Elin Östlind; Eva Ekvall Hansson; Frida Eek; Kjerstin Stigmar
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2022-08-30       Impact factor: 4.135

5.  Feasibility of using activity trackers and apps to increase physical activity in whole families: The Step it Up Family intervention.

Authors:  Stephanie Schoeppe; Jo Salmon; Susan Williams; Deborah Power; Kim Waters; Stephanie Alley; Amanda L Rebar; Melanie Hayman; Mitch J Duncan; Corneel Vandelanotte
Journal:  Digit Health       Date:  2022-10-06

Review 6.  The Acceptability, Feasibility, and Effectiveness of Wearable Activity Trackers for Increasing Physical Activity in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Amy V Creaser; Stacy A Clemes; Silvia Costa; Jennifer Hall; Nicola D Ridgers; Sally E Barber; Daniel D Bingham
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-06-08       Impact factor: 3.390

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.