Kelly R Evenson1, Camden L Spade2. 1. Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States. 2. Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States.
Abstract
PURPOSE: A systematic review to summarize the validity and reliability of steps, distance, energy expenditure, speed, elevation, heart rate, and sleep assessed by Garmin activity trackers. METHODS: Searches included studies published through December 31, 2018. Correlation coefficients (CC) were assessed as low (<0.60), moderate (0.60-<0.75), good (0.75-<0.90), or excellent (>=0.90). Mean absolute percentage errors (MAPE) were assessed as acceptable at <5% in controlled conditions and <10% for free-living. RESULTS: Overall, 32 studies of adults documented validity. Four of these studies also documented reliability. The sample size ranged from 1 to 95 for validity and 4 to 31 for reliability testing. Step inter- and intra-reliability was good-to-excellent and speed intra-reliability was excellent. No other features were explored for reliability. Step validity, across 16 studies, generally indicated good-to-excellent CC and acceptable MAPE. Distance validity, tested in three studies, generally indicated poor CC and MAPE that exceeded acceptable limits, with both over and underestimation. Energy expenditure validity, across 12 studies, generally indicated wide variability in CC and MAPE that exceeded acceptable limits. Heart rate validity in five studies had low-to-excellent CC and all MAPE exceeded acceptable limits. Speed, elevation, and sleep validity were assessed in only one or two studies each; for sleep, the criterion relied on self-report rather than polysomnography. CONCLUSION: This systematic review of Garmin activity trackers among adults indicated higher validity of steps; few studies on speed, elevation, and sleep; and lower validity for distance, energy expenditure, and heart rate. Intra- and inter-device feature reliability needs further testing.
PURPOSE: A systematic review to summarize the validity and reliability of steps, distance, energy expenditure, speed, elevation, heart rate, and sleep assessed by Garmin activity trackers. METHODS: Searches included studies published through December 31, 2018. Correlation coefficients (CC) were assessed as low (<0.60), moderate (0.60-<0.75), good (0.75-<0.90), or excellent (>=0.90). Mean absolute percentage errors (MAPE) were assessed as acceptable at <5% in controlled conditions and <10% for free-living. RESULTS: Overall, 32 studies of adults documented validity. Four of these studies also documented reliability. The sample size ranged from 1 to 95 for validity and 4 to 31 for reliability testing. Step inter- and intra-reliability was good-to-excellent and speed intra-reliability was excellent. No other features were explored for reliability. Step validity, across 16 studies, generally indicated good-to-excellent CC and acceptable MAPE. Distance validity, tested in three studies, generally indicated poor CC and MAPE that exceeded acceptable limits, with both over and underestimation. Energy expenditure validity, across 12 studies, generally indicated wide variability in CC and MAPE that exceeded acceptable limits. Heart rate validity in five studies had low-to-excellent CC and all MAPE exceeded acceptable limits. Speed, elevation, and sleep validity were assessed in only one or two studies each; for sleep, the criterion relied on self-report rather than polysomnography. CONCLUSION: This systematic review of Garmin activity trackers among adults indicated higher validity of steps; few studies on speed, elevation, and sleep; and lower validity for distance, energy expenditure, and heart rate. Intra- and inter-device feature reliability needs further testing.
Authors: Johan Cassirame; Romain Vanhaesebrouck; Simon Chevrolat; Laurent Mourot Journal: Australas Phys Eng Sci Med Date: 2017-10-20 Impact factor: 1.430
Authors: Daniel V Gaz; Thomas M Rieck; Nolan W Peterson; Jennifer A Ferguson; Darrell R Schroeder; Heather A Dunfee; Jill M Henderzahs-Mason; Philip T Hagen Journal: Am J Health Promot Date: 2018-03-20
Authors: M Ryan Mason; James H Hudgins; Marilyn S Campbell; Martha J Biddle; Mindy J Ickes; Adam Dugan; Lance M Bollinger Journal: J Sports Sci Date: 2021-09-10 Impact factor: 3.337
Authors: Verena Hartung; Mustafa Sarshar; Viktoria Karle; Layal Shammas; Asarnusch Rashid; Paul Roullier; Caroline Eilers; Mathias Mäurer; Peter Flachenecker; Klaus Pfeifer; Alexander Tallner Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-12-12 Impact factor: 3.390