Validity of Wrist-Wearable Activity Devices for Estimating Physical Activity in Adolescents: Comparative Study
BackgroundThe rapid advancements in science and technology of wrist-wearable activity devices offer considerable potential for clinical applications. Self-monitoring of physical activity (PA) with activity devices is helpful to improve the PA levels of adolescents. However, knowing the accuracy of a...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
JMIR Publications
2021-01-01
|
| Series: | JMIR mHealth and uHealth |
| Online Access: | http://mhealth.jmir.org/2021/1/e18320/ |
| _version_ | 1818385607984939008 |
|---|---|
| author | Hao, Yingying Ma, Xiao-Kai Zhu, Zheng Cao, Zhen-Bo |
| author_facet | Hao, Yingying Ma, Xiao-Kai Zhu, Zheng Cao, Zhen-Bo |
| author_sort | Hao, Yingying |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | BackgroundThe rapid advancements in science and technology of wrist-wearable activity devices offer considerable potential for clinical applications. Self-monitoring of physical activity (PA) with activity devices is helpful to improve the PA levels of adolescents. However, knowing the accuracy of activity devices in adolescents is necessary to identify current levels of PA and assess the effectiveness of intervention programs designed to increase PA.
ObjectiveThe study aimed to determine the validity of the 11 commercially available wrist-wearable activity devices for monitoring total steps and total 24-hour total energy expenditure (TEE) in healthy adolescents under simulated free-living conditions.
MethodsNineteen (10 male and 9 female) participants aged 14 to 18 years performed a 24-hour activity cycle in a metabolic chamber. Each participant simultaneously wore 11 commercial wrist-wearable activity devices (Mi Band 2 [XiaoMi], B2 [Huawei], Bong 2s [Meizu], Amazfit [Huamei], Flex [Fitbit], UP3 [Jawbone], Shine 2 [Misfit], GOLiFE Care-X [GoYourLife], Pulse O2 [Withings], Vivofit [Garmin], and Loop [Polar Electro]) and one research-based triaxial accelerometer (GT3X+ [ActiGraph]). Criterion measures were total EE from the metabolic chamber (mcTEE) and total steps from the GT3X+ (AGsteps).
ResultsPearson correlation coefficients r for 24-hour TEE ranged from .78 (Shine 2, Amazfit) to .96 (Loop) and for steps ranged from 0.20 (GOLiFE) to 0.57 (Vivofit). Mean absolute percent error (MAPE) for TEE ranged from 5.7% (Mi Band 2) to 26.4% (Amazfit) and for steps ranged from 14.2% (Bong 2s) to 27.6% (Loop). TEE estimates from the Mi Band 2, UP3, Vivofit, and Bong 2s were equivalent to mcTEE. Total steps from the Bong 2s were equivalent to AGsteps.
ConclusionsOverall, the Bong 2s had the best accuracy for estimating TEE and total steps under simulated free-living conditions. Further research is needed to examine the validity of these devices in different types of physical activities under real-world conditions. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-14T03:40:51Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-2daa447272d7427a8be59a10035ed680 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2291-5222 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-14T03:40:51Z |
| publishDate | 2021-01-01 |
| publisher | JMIR Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | JMIR mHealth and uHealth |
| spelling | doaj.art-2daa447272d7427a8be59a10035ed6802022-12-21T23:18:29ZengJMIR PublicationsJMIR mHealth and uHealth2291-52222021-01-0191e1832010.2196/18320Validity of Wrist-Wearable Activity Devices for Estimating Physical Activity in Adolescents: Comparative StudyHao, YingyingMa, Xiao-KaiZhu, ZhengCao, Zhen-BoBackgroundThe rapid advancements in science and technology of wrist-wearable activity devices offer considerable potential for clinical applications. Self-monitoring of physical activity (PA) with activity devices is helpful to improve the PA levels of adolescents. However, knowing the accuracy of activity devices in adolescents is necessary to identify current levels of PA and assess the effectiveness of intervention programs designed to increase PA. ObjectiveThe study aimed to determine the validity of the 11 commercially available wrist-wearable activity devices for monitoring total steps and total 24-hour total energy expenditure (TEE) in healthy adolescents under simulated free-living conditions. MethodsNineteen (10 male and 9 female) participants aged 14 to 18 years performed a 24-hour activity cycle in a metabolic chamber. Each participant simultaneously wore 11 commercial wrist-wearable activity devices (Mi Band 2 [XiaoMi], B2 [Huawei], Bong 2s [Meizu], Amazfit [Huamei], Flex [Fitbit], UP3 [Jawbone], Shine 2 [Misfit], GOLiFE Care-X [GoYourLife], Pulse O2 [Withings], Vivofit [Garmin], and Loop [Polar Electro]) and one research-based triaxial accelerometer (GT3X+ [ActiGraph]). Criterion measures were total EE from the metabolic chamber (mcTEE) and total steps from the GT3X+ (AGsteps). ResultsPearson correlation coefficients r for 24-hour TEE ranged from .78 (Shine 2, Amazfit) to .96 (Loop) and for steps ranged from 0.20 (GOLiFE) to 0.57 (Vivofit). Mean absolute percent error (MAPE) for TEE ranged from 5.7% (Mi Band 2) to 26.4% (Amazfit) and for steps ranged from 14.2% (Bong 2s) to 27.6% (Loop). TEE estimates from the Mi Band 2, UP3, Vivofit, and Bong 2s were equivalent to mcTEE. Total steps from the Bong 2s were equivalent to AGsteps. ConclusionsOverall, the Bong 2s had the best accuracy for estimating TEE and total steps under simulated free-living conditions. Further research is needed to examine the validity of these devices in different types of physical activities under real-world conditions.http://mhealth.jmir.org/2021/1/e18320/ |
| spellingShingle | Hao, Yingying Ma, Xiao-Kai Zhu, Zheng Cao, Zhen-Bo Validity of Wrist-Wearable Activity Devices for Estimating Physical Activity in Adolescents: Comparative Study JMIR mHealth and uHealth |
| title | Validity of Wrist-Wearable Activity Devices for Estimating Physical Activity in Adolescents: Comparative Study |
| title_full | Validity of Wrist-Wearable Activity Devices for Estimating Physical Activity in Adolescents: Comparative Study |
| title_fullStr | Validity of Wrist-Wearable Activity Devices for Estimating Physical Activity in Adolescents: Comparative Study |
| title_full_unstemmed | Validity of Wrist-Wearable Activity Devices for Estimating Physical Activity in Adolescents: Comparative Study |
| title_short | Validity of Wrist-Wearable Activity Devices for Estimating Physical Activity in Adolescents: Comparative Study |
| title_sort | validity of wrist wearable activity devices for estimating physical activity in adolescents comparative study |
| url | http://mhealth.jmir.org/2021/1/e18320/ |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT haoyingying validityofwristwearableactivitydevicesforestimatingphysicalactivityinadolescentscomparativestudy AT maxiaokai validityofwristwearableactivitydevicesforestimatingphysicalactivityinadolescentscomparativestudy AT zhuzheng validityofwristwearableactivitydevicesforestimatingphysicalactivityinadolescentscomparativestudy AT caozhenbo validityofwristwearableactivitydevicesforestimatingphysicalactivityinadolescentscomparativestudy |