1University College Cork, School of Education, Cork, Ireland
2Department of Education and Social Work, University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg
Validity of Wearable Monitors and Smartphone Applications to Measure Steps and Distance in Adolescents
Sport Mont 2022, 20(2), 3-10 | DOI: 10.26773/smj.220601
Abstract
The growing popularity of wearable physical activity (PA) monitors and fitness applications (apps) in recent years and the vast amounts of data that they generate present attractive possibilities for surveillance. However, measurement accuracy is indispensable when tracking PA variables to provide meaningful measures of PA. The purpose of this study was to examine the criterion validity of wearable PA monitors and a combination of GPS and accelerometer free of charge smartphone apps, during self-paced outdoor walking and running. Thirty-eight healthy adolescents (15.3±2.0 years) participated in this cross-sectional study. They were fitted with Garmin Forerunner 310XT, Garmin Vivofit, Medisana Vifit, and smartphones running the Runkeeper, Runtastic, Sports Tracker (GPS), Pedometer, Accupedo, Pedometer and Pedometer 2.0 (accelerometer) apps. They were asked to walk and run 1.22 km for each trial and two researchers counted every step taken during trials with a digital tally counter. Validity was evaluated by comparing each device with the criterion measure using Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA), Mean Absolute Percentage Errors (MAPE) and Bland-Altman plots. MAPE were low for Forerunner and GPS apps for distance in both conditions (2.27%- 9.73%), and significantly higher for the accelerometer monitors and apps (6.92%-39.02%). Vivofit (MAPE=6.51%) and Vifit (MAPE=6.66%) accurately estimated the number of steps during walking, however only Vivofit (MAPE=3.95%) was accurate during running. All accelerometer-based apps had high MAPE for step counting (9.87%-40.26%). The findings suggested that GPS monitors and apps were accurate tools for counting distance during walking and running, while accelerometer- based monitors and apps had higher errors. Vivofit provided accurate estimates of step count in both conditions, and Medisana Vifit was valid during walking. Accupedo was the only app with an acceptable step count error.
Keywords
wearable activity tracker, GPS, accelerometer, fitness tracker, step count
View full article
(PDF – 523KB)
References
Adamakis, M. (2017). Comparing the validity of a GPS monitor and a smartphone application to measure physical activity. Journal of Mobile Technology in Medicine, 6(2), 28-38. https://doi.org/10.7309/jmtm.6.2.4
Adamakis, M. (2020). Criterion validity of wearable monitors and smartphone applications to measure physical activity energy expenditure in adolescents. Sport Sciences for Health, 16 (4), 755-763. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11332-020-00654-2
Adamakis, M. (2021). Criterion validity of iOS and Android applications to measure steps and distance in adults. Technologies, 9(3), 55. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/technologies9030055
American College of Sports Medicine (2006). ACSM’s guidelines for exercise testing and prescription (7th ed.) Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins.
Bent, B., & Dunn, J. P. (2020). Wearables in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: what are they good for? JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 8(12), e25137. https://doi.org/10.2196/25137
Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (1986). Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet, 327 (8476), 307-310. PMID: 2868172
Bull, F. C., Al-Ansari, S. S., Biddle, S., Borodulin, K., Buman, M. P., Cardon, G., … Willumsen, J. F. (2020). World Health Organization 2020 guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 54 (24), 1451-1462. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2020-102955
Case, M. A., Burwick, H. A., Volpp, K. G., & Patel, M. S. (2015). Accuracy of smartphone applications and wearable devices for tracking physical activity data. JAMA, 313 (6), 625-626. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.17841
Dowd, K. P., Szeklicki, R., Minetto, M. A., Murphy, M. H., Polito, A., Ghigo, E., … & Donnelly, A. E. (2018). A systematic literature review of reviews on techniques for physical activity measurement in adults: a DEDIPAC study. The International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 15 (1), 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-017-0636-2
Evenson, K. R., Goto, M. M., & Furberg, R. D. (2015). Systematic review of the validity and reliability of consumer-wearable activity trackers. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 12(1), 159. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-015-0314-1
Evenson, K. R., & Spade, C. L. (2020). Review of validity and reliability of Garmin activity trackers. Journal for the Measurement of Physical Behaviour, 3 (2), 170-185 https://doi.org/10.1123/jmpb.2019-0035
Feehan, L. M., Geldman, J., Sayre, E. C., Park, C., Ezzat, A. M., Yoo, J. Y., Hamilton, C. B., & Li, L. C. (2018). Accuracy of Fitbit devices: systematic review and narrative syntheses of quantitative data. JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 6 (8), e10527. https://doi.org/10.2196/10527
Funk, M. D., Salazar, C. L., Martinez, M., Gonzalez, J., Leyva, P., Bassett Jr., D., & Karabulut, M. (2019). Validity of smartphone applications at measuring steps: does wear location matter? Journal for the Measurement of Physical Behaviour, 2 (1), 22-27. https://doi.org/10.1123/jmpb.2018-0025
Gaz, D. V., Rieck, T. M., Peterson, N. W., Ferguson, J. A., Schroeder, D. R., Dunfee, H. A., Henderzahs-Mason, J. M., & Hagen, P. T. (2018). Determining the validity and accuracy of multiple activity-tracking devices in controlled and free-walking conditions. American Journal of Health Promotion, 32 (8), 1671-1678. https://doi.org/10.1177/0890117118763273
Gray, A. J., Jenkins, D., Andrews, M. H., Taaffe, D. R., & Glover, M. L. (2010). Validity and reliability of GPS for measuring distance travelled in field-based team sports. Journal of Sports Sciences, 28(12), 1319-1325. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2010.504783
Höchsmann, C., Knaier, R., Eymann, J., Hintermann, J., Infanger, D., & Schmidt-Trucksäss, A. (2018). Validity of activity trackers, smartphones, and phone applications to measure steps in various walking conditions. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, 28(7), 1818-1827. https://doi.org/10.1111/sms.13074
Huang, Y., Xu, J., Yu, B., & Shull, P. B. (2016). Validity of FitBit, Jawbone UP, Nike+ and other wearable devices for level and stair walking. Gait and Posture, 48, 36-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2016.04.025
John, D., Morton, A., Arguello, D., Lyden, K., & Bassett, D. (2018). “What Is a step?” Differences in how a step is detected among three popular activity monitors that have impacted physical activity research. Sensors, 18 (4), 1206. https://doi.org/10.3390/s18041206
Johnston, W., Judice, P. B., Molina García, P., Mühlen, J. M., Lykke Skovgaard, E., Stang, J., … & Sardinha, L. B. (2020). Recommendations for determining the validity of consumer wearable and smartphone step count: expert statement and checklist of the INTERLIVE network. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 55 (14), 780-793. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2020-103147
Keadle, S. K., Lyden, K. A., Strath, S. J., Staudenmayer, J. W., & Freedson, P. S. (2019). A framework to evaluate devices that assess physical behavior. Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews, 47(4), 206-214. https://doi.org/10.1249/JES.0000000000000206
Ludbrook, J. (2002). Statistical techniques for comparing measurers and methods of measurement: a critical review. Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology and Physiology, 29 (7), 527-536. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-1681.2002.03686.x
Moore, C. C., McCullough, A. K., Aguiar, E. J., Ducharme, S. W., & Tudor-Locke, C. (2020). Toward harmonized treadmill-based validation of step-counting wearable technologies: a scoping review. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 17 (8), 840-852. https://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.2019-0205
Nelson, M. B., Kaminsky, L. A., Dickin, D. C., & Montoye, A. H. (2016). Validity of consumer-based physical activity monitors for specific activity types. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 48(8), 1619-1628. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000000933
Omura, J. D., Carlson, S. A., Paul, P., Watson, K. B., & Fulton, J. E. (2017). National physical activity surveillance: users of wearable activity monitors as a potential data source. Preventive Medicine Reports, 5, 124-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2016.10.014
Orr, K., Howe, H. S., Omran, J., Smith, K. A., Palmateer, T. M., Ma, A. E., & Faulkner, G. (2015). Validity of smartphone pedometer applications. BMC Research Notes, 8 (1), 733. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-015-1705-8
Pobiruchin, M., Suleder, J., Zowalla, R., & Wiesner, M., (2017). Accuracy and adoption of wearable technology used by active citizens: a marathon event field study. JMIR mHealth uHealth, 5 (2), e24. https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.6395
Scott, M. T., Scott, T. J., & Kelly, V. G. (2016). The validity and reliability of Global Positioning Systems in team sport: a brief review. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 30(5), 1470–1490. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000001221
Silva, A. G., Simões, P., Queirós, A., Rodrigues, M., & Rocha, N. P. (2020). Mobile apps to quantify aspects of physical activity: a systematic review on its reliability and validity. Journal of Medical Systems, 44(2), 51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-019-1506-z
Tierney, P., & Clarke, N. (2019). A comparison of a smartphone app with other GPS tracking type devices employed in football. Exercise Medicine, 3(4), 1-7 . https://doi.org/10.26644/em.2019.004
Troiano, R. P., Stamatakis, E., & Bull, F. C. (2020). How can global physical activity surveillance adapt to evolving physical activity guidelines? Needs, challenges and future directions. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 54 (24), 1468-1473. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2020-102621
Warner, R. M. (2012). Applied Statistics: From Bivariate Through Multivariate Techniques (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
WHO (2020). Guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Geneva: World Health Organization. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO. Retrieved online from https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240015128