Reliability and validity of ten consumer activity trackers

Thea Kooiman, Manon L. Dontje, Siska Sprenger, Wim Krijnen, Cees van der Schans, Martijn de Groot

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

99 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: Activity trackers can potentially stimulate users to increase their physical activity behavior. The aim of this study was to examine the reliability and validity of ten consumer activity trackers for measuring step count in both laboratory and free-living conditions.
Method: Healthy adult volunteers (n = 33) walked twice on a treadmill (4.8 km/h) for 30 min while wearing ten different activity trackers (i.e. Lumoback, Fitbit Flex, Jawbone Up, Nike+ Fuelband SE, Misfit Shine, Withings Pulse, Fitbit Zip, Omron HJ-203, Yamax Digiwalker SW-200 and Moves mobile application). In free-living conditions, 56 volunteers wore the same activity trackers for one working day. Test-retest reliability was analyzed with the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC).
Validity was evaluated by comparing each tracker with the gold standard (Optogait system for laboratory and ActivPAL for free-living conditions), using paired samples t-tests, mean absolute percentage errors, correlations and Bland-Altman plots.
Results: Test-retest analysis revealed high reliability for most trackers except for the Omron (ICC .14), Moves app (ICC .37) and Nike+ Fuelband (ICC .53). The mean absolute percentage errors of the trackers in laboratory and free-living conditions respectively, were: Lumoback (−0.2, −0.4), Fibit Flex (−5.7, 3.7), Jawbone Up (−1.0, 1.4), Nike+ Fuelband (−18, −24), Misfit Shine (0.2, 1.1), Withings Pulse (−0.5, −7.9), Fitbit Zip (−0.3, 1.2), Omron (2.5, −0.4), Digiwalker (−1.2, −5.9), and Moves app (9.6, −37.6). Bland-Altman plots demonstrated that the limits of agreement varied from 46 steps (Fitbit Zip) to 2422 steps (Nike+ Fuelband) in the laboratory condition, and 866 steps (Fitbit Zip) to 5150 steps (Moves app) in the free-living condition.
Conclusion: The reliability and validity of most trackers for measuring step count is good. The Fitbit Zip is the most valid whereas the reliability and validity of the Nike+ Fuelband is low.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-12
JournalBMC sports science, medicine and rehabilitation
Volume7
Issue number24
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015

Keywords

  • activity trackers
  • reliability
  • validity

Cite this

@article{e14b7f021c594b2f827bb72f999d6357,
title = "Reliability and validity of ten consumer activity trackers",
abstract = "Background: Activity trackers can potentially stimulate users to increase their physical activity behavior. The aim of this study was to examine the reliability and validity of ten consumer activity trackers for measuring step count in both laboratory and free-living conditions.Method: Healthy adult volunteers (n = 33) walked twice on a treadmill (4.8 km/h) for 30 min while wearing ten different activity trackers (i.e. Lumoback, Fitbit Flex, Jawbone Up, Nike+ Fuelband SE, Misfit Shine, Withings Pulse, Fitbit Zip, Omron HJ-203, Yamax Digiwalker SW-200 and Moves mobile application). In free-living conditions, 56 volunteers wore the same activity trackers for one working day. Test-retest reliability was analyzed with the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC).Validity was evaluated by comparing each tracker with the gold standard (Optogait system for laboratory and ActivPAL for free-living conditions), using paired samples t-tests, mean absolute percentage errors, correlations and Bland-Altman plots.Results: Test-retest analysis revealed high reliability for most trackers except for the Omron (ICC .14), Moves app (ICC .37) and Nike+ Fuelband (ICC .53). The mean absolute percentage errors of the trackers in laboratory and free-living conditions respectively, were: Lumoback (−0.2, −0.4), Fibit Flex (−5.7, 3.7), Jawbone Up (−1.0, 1.4), Nike+ Fuelband (−18, −24), Misfit Shine (0.2, 1.1), Withings Pulse (−0.5, −7.9), Fitbit Zip (−0.3, 1.2), Omron (2.5, −0.4), Digiwalker (−1.2, −5.9), and Moves app (9.6, −37.6). Bland-Altman plots demonstrated that the limits of agreement varied from 46 steps (Fitbit Zip) to 2422 steps (Nike+ Fuelband) in the laboratory condition, and 866 steps (Fitbit Zip) to 5150 steps (Moves app) in the free-living condition.Conclusion: The reliability and validity of most trackers for measuring step count is good. The Fitbit Zip is the most valid whereas the reliability and validity of the Nike+ Fuelband is low.",
keywords = "activity trackers, reliability, validity, zelfmeting, sensortechnologie",
author = "Thea Kooiman and Dontje, {Manon L.} and Siska Sprenger and Wim Krijnen and {van der Schans}, Cees and {de Groot}, Martijn",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.1186/s13102-015-0018-5",
language = "English",
volume = "7",
pages = "1--12",
journal = "BMC sports science, medicine and rehabilitation",
issn = "2052-1847",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "24",

}

Reliability and validity of ten consumer activity trackers. / Kooiman, Thea; Dontje, Manon L.; Sprenger, Siska; Krijnen, Wim; van der Schans, Cees; de Groot, Martijn.

In: BMC sports science, medicine and rehabilitation, Vol. 7, No. 24, 2015, p. 1-12.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reliability and validity of ten consumer activity trackers

AU - Kooiman, Thea

AU - Dontje, Manon L.

AU - Sprenger, Siska

AU - Krijnen, Wim

AU - van der Schans, Cees

AU - de Groot, Martijn

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - Background: Activity trackers can potentially stimulate users to increase their physical activity behavior. The aim of this study was to examine the reliability and validity of ten consumer activity trackers for measuring step count in both laboratory and free-living conditions.Method: Healthy adult volunteers (n = 33) walked twice on a treadmill (4.8 km/h) for 30 min while wearing ten different activity trackers (i.e. Lumoback, Fitbit Flex, Jawbone Up, Nike+ Fuelband SE, Misfit Shine, Withings Pulse, Fitbit Zip, Omron HJ-203, Yamax Digiwalker SW-200 and Moves mobile application). In free-living conditions, 56 volunteers wore the same activity trackers for one working day. Test-retest reliability was analyzed with the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC).Validity was evaluated by comparing each tracker with the gold standard (Optogait system for laboratory and ActivPAL for free-living conditions), using paired samples t-tests, mean absolute percentage errors, correlations and Bland-Altman plots.Results: Test-retest analysis revealed high reliability for most trackers except for the Omron (ICC .14), Moves app (ICC .37) and Nike+ Fuelband (ICC .53). The mean absolute percentage errors of the trackers in laboratory and free-living conditions respectively, were: Lumoback (−0.2, −0.4), Fibit Flex (−5.7, 3.7), Jawbone Up (−1.0, 1.4), Nike+ Fuelband (−18, −24), Misfit Shine (0.2, 1.1), Withings Pulse (−0.5, −7.9), Fitbit Zip (−0.3, 1.2), Omron (2.5, −0.4), Digiwalker (−1.2, −5.9), and Moves app (9.6, −37.6). Bland-Altman plots demonstrated that the limits of agreement varied from 46 steps (Fitbit Zip) to 2422 steps (Nike+ Fuelband) in the laboratory condition, and 866 steps (Fitbit Zip) to 5150 steps (Moves app) in the free-living condition.Conclusion: The reliability and validity of most trackers for measuring step count is good. The Fitbit Zip is the most valid whereas the reliability and validity of the Nike+ Fuelband is low.

AB - Background: Activity trackers can potentially stimulate users to increase their physical activity behavior. The aim of this study was to examine the reliability and validity of ten consumer activity trackers for measuring step count in both laboratory and free-living conditions.Method: Healthy adult volunteers (n = 33) walked twice on a treadmill (4.8 km/h) for 30 min while wearing ten different activity trackers (i.e. Lumoback, Fitbit Flex, Jawbone Up, Nike+ Fuelband SE, Misfit Shine, Withings Pulse, Fitbit Zip, Omron HJ-203, Yamax Digiwalker SW-200 and Moves mobile application). In free-living conditions, 56 volunteers wore the same activity trackers for one working day. Test-retest reliability was analyzed with the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC).Validity was evaluated by comparing each tracker with the gold standard (Optogait system for laboratory and ActivPAL for free-living conditions), using paired samples t-tests, mean absolute percentage errors, correlations and Bland-Altman plots.Results: Test-retest analysis revealed high reliability for most trackers except for the Omron (ICC .14), Moves app (ICC .37) and Nike+ Fuelband (ICC .53). The mean absolute percentage errors of the trackers in laboratory and free-living conditions respectively, were: Lumoback (−0.2, −0.4), Fibit Flex (−5.7, 3.7), Jawbone Up (−1.0, 1.4), Nike+ Fuelband (−18, −24), Misfit Shine (0.2, 1.1), Withings Pulse (−0.5, −7.9), Fitbit Zip (−0.3, 1.2), Omron (2.5, −0.4), Digiwalker (−1.2, −5.9), and Moves app (9.6, −37.6). Bland-Altman plots demonstrated that the limits of agreement varied from 46 steps (Fitbit Zip) to 2422 steps (Nike+ Fuelband) in the laboratory condition, and 866 steps (Fitbit Zip) to 5150 steps (Moves app) in the free-living condition.Conclusion: The reliability and validity of most trackers for measuring step count is good. The Fitbit Zip is the most valid whereas the reliability and validity of the Nike+ Fuelband is low.

KW - activity trackers

KW - reliability

KW - validity

KW - zelfmeting

KW - sensortechnologie

UR - http://www.mendeley.com/research/reliability-validity-ten-consumer-activity-trackers

U2 - 10.1186/s13102-015-0018-5

DO - 10.1186/s13102-015-0018-5

M3 - Article

VL - 7

SP - 1

EP - 12

JO - BMC sports science, medicine and rehabilitation

JF - BMC sports science, medicine and rehabilitation

SN - 2052-1847

IS - 24

ER -