» Articles » PMID: 33410757

Validity of Wrist-Wearable Activity Devices for Estimating Physical Activity in Adolescents: Comparative Study

Overview
Date 2021 Jan 7
PMID 33410757
Citations 16
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The 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.

Objective: The 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.

Methods: Nineteen (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).

Results: Pearson 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.

Conclusions: Overall, 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.

Citing Articles

Promoting child and adolescent health through wearable technology: A systematic review.

Zhang W, Xiong K, Zhu C, Evans R, Zhou L, Podrini C Digit Health. 2024; 10:20552076241260507.

PMID: 38868368 PMC: 11168039. DOI: 10.1177/20552076241260507.


Comparison of Physical Activity Measured by Self-Reported Physical Activity and Wearable Device Xiaomi MI2 Band in Preadolescent School Children - A Pilot Cross-Sectional Study.

Almas A, Hashmi S, Elahi A, Parkash O, Sabir S, Iqbal R Int J Exerc Sci. 2024; 17(7):565-575.

PMID: 38859892 PMC: 11164430. DOI: 10.70252/JACS9712.


Incorporating Wearable Technology for Enhanced Rehabilitation Monitoring after Hip and Knee Replacement.

Lebleu J, Daniels K, Pauwels A, Dekimpe L, Mapinduzi J, Poilvache H Sensors (Basel). 2024; 24(4).

PMID: 38400321 PMC: 10892564. DOI: 10.3390/s24041163.


Tracking of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) Longitudinally Using Biosensor and Patient-Reported Data: A Report on the Fully Decentralized Mobile Study to Measure and Predict Lupus Disease Activity Using Digital Signals-The OASIS Study.

Jupe E, Lushington G, Purushothaman M, Pautasso F, Armstrong G, Sorathia A BioTech (Basel). 2023; 12(4).

PMID: 37987479 PMC: 10660535. DOI: 10.3390/biotech12040062.


Microfluidic Wearable Devices for Sports Applications.

Ju F, Wang Y, Yin B, Zhao M, Zhang Y, Gong Y Micromachines (Basel). 2023; 14(9).

PMID: 37763955 PMC: 10535163. DOI: 10.3390/mi14091792.


References
1.
Menschik D, Ahmed S, Alexander M, Blum R . Adolescent physical activities as predictors of young adult weight. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2008; 162(1):29-33. DOI: 10.1001/archpediatrics.2007.14. View

2.
Blazer D . Social support and mortality in an elderly community population. Am J Epidemiol. 1982; 115(5):684-94. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a113351. View

3.
Fan X, Cao Z . Physical activity among Chinese school-aged children: National prevalence estimates from the 2016 Physical Activity and Fitness in China-The Youth Study. J Sport Health Sci. 2018; 6(4):388-394. PMC: 6189233. DOI: 10.1016/j.jshs.2017.09.006. View

4.
Chen Y, Zheng Z, Yi J, Yao S . Associations between physical inactivity and sedentary behaviors among adolescents in 10 cities in China. BMC Public Health. 2014; 14:744. PMC: 4223766. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-744. View

5.
Storm F, Heller B, Mazza C . Step detection and activity recognition accuracy of seven physical activity monitors. PLoS One. 2015; 10(3):e0118723. PMC: 4366111. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118723. View