Validity evaluation of the Fitbit Charge2 and the Garmin vivosmart HR+ in free-living environments in an older adult cohort

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Tedesco, Salvatore
dc.contributor.author Sica, Marco
dc.contributor.author Ancillao, Andrea
dc.contributor.author Timmons, Suzanne
dc.contributor.author Barton, John
dc.contributor.author O'Flynn, Brendan
dc.date.accessioned 2019-09-10T16:08:17Z
dc.date.available 2019-09-10T16:08:17Z
dc.date.issued 2019-06-19
dc.identifier.citation Tedesco, S., Sica, M., Ancillao, A., Timmons, S., Barton, J. and O'Flynn, B. (2019) 'Validity Evaluation of the Fitbit Charge2 and the Garmin vivosmart HR+ in Free-Living Environments in an Older Adult Cohort', JMIR Mhealth Uhealth, 7(6), e13084. DOI: 10.2196/13084 en
dc.identifier.volume 7 en
dc.identifier.issued 6 en
dc.identifier.startpage 1 en
dc.identifier.endpage 15 en
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10468/8510
dc.identifier.doi 10.2196/13084 en
dc.description.abstract Background: Few studies have investigated the validity of mainstream wrist-based activity trackers in healthy older adults in real life, as opposed to laboratory settings. Objective: This study explored the performance of two wrist-worn trackers (Fitbit Charge 2 and Garmin vivosmart HR+) in estimating steps, energy expenditure, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) levels, and sleep parameters (total sleep time [TST] and wake after sleep onset [WASO]) against gold-standard technologies in a cohort of healthy older adults in a free-living environment. Methods: Overall, 20 participants (>65 years) took part in the study. The devices were worn by the participants for 24 hours, and the results were compared against validated technology (ActiGraph and New-Lifestyles NL-2000i). Mean error, mean percentage error (MPE), mean absolute percentage error (MAPE), intraclass correlation (ICC), and Bland-Altman plots were computed for all the parameters considered. Results: For step counting, all trackers were highly correlated with one another (ICCs>0.89). Although the Fitbit tended to overcount steps (MPE=12.36%), the Garmin and ActiGraph undercounted (MPE 9.36% and 11.53%, respectively). The Garmin had poor ICC values when energy expenditure was compared against the criterion. The Fitbit had moderate-to-good ICCs in comparison to the other activity trackers, and showed the best results (MAPE=12.25%), although it underestimated calories burned. For MVPA levels estimation, the wristband trackers were highly correlated (ICC=0.96); however, they were moderately correlated against the criterion and they overestimated MVPA activity minutes. For the sleep parameters, the ICCs were poor for all cases, except when comparing the Fitbit with the criterion, which showed moderate agreement. The TST was slightly overestimated with the Fitbit, although it provided good results with an average MAPE equal to 10.13%. Conversely, WASO estimation was poorer and was overestimated by the Fitbit but underestimated by the Garmin. Again, the Fitbit was the most accurate, with an average MAPE of 49.7%. Conclusions: The tested well-known devices could be adopted to estimate steps, energy expenditure, and sleep duration with an acceptable level of accuracy in the population of interest, although clinicians should be cautious in considering other parameters for clinical and research purposes. en
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf en
dc.language.iso en en
dc.publisher JMIR Publications en
dc.relation.uri https://mhealth.jmir.org/2019/6/e13084/
dc.rights ©Salvatore Tedesco, Marco Sica, Andrea Ancillao, Suzanne Timmons, John Barton, Brendan O'Flynn. Originally published in JMIR Mhealth and Uhealth (http://mhealth.jmir.org), 19.06.2019. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR mhealth and uhealth, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://mhealth.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included. JMIR mHealth and uHealth ISSN 2291-5222 en
dc.rights.uri https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ en
dc.subject Aging en
dc.subject Fitness tracker en
dc.subject Wristbands en
dc.subject Older adults en
dc.subject Wearable activity trackers en
dc.subject Fitbit en
dc.subject Garmin en
dc.subject Energy expenditure en
dc.subject Physical activity en
dc.subject Sleep en
dc.title Validity evaluation of the Fitbit Charge2 and the Garmin vivosmart HR+ in free-living environments in an older adult cohort en
dc.type Article (peer-reviewed) en
dc.internal.authorcontactother Salvatore Tedesco, Tyndall National Institute, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland. +353-21-490-3000 Email: salvatore.tedesco@tyndall.ie en
dc.internal.availability Full text available en
dc.description.version Published Version en
dc.contributor.funder Horizon 2020 en
dc.contributor.funder Science Foundation Ireland en
dc.description.status Peer reviewed en
dc.identifier.journaltitle JMIR mHealth and uHealth en
dc.internal.IRISemailaddress salvatore.tedesco@tyndall.ie en
dc.identifier.articleid e13084 en
dc.relation.project info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/EC/H2020::RIA/689996/EU/Integrated Technology Ecosystem for ProACTive Patient Centred Care/ProACT en
dc.relation.project info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/SFI/SFI Research Centres/13/RC/2077/IE/CONNECT: The Centre for Future Networks & Communications/ en
dc.identifier.eissn 2291-5222


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

©Salvatore Tedesco, Marco Sica, Andrea Ancillao, Suzanne Timmons, John Barton, Brendan O'Flynn. Originally published in JMIR Mhealth and Uhealth (http://mhealth.jmir.org), 19.06.2019.  This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR mhealth and uhealth, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://mhealth.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.   JMIR mHealth and uHealth ISSN 2291-5222 Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as ©Salvatore Tedesco, Marco Sica, Andrea Ancillao, Suzanne Timmons, John Barton, Brendan O'Flynn. Originally published in JMIR Mhealth and Uhealth (http://mhealth.jmir.org), 19.06.2019. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR mhealth and uhealth, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://mhealth.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included. JMIR mHealth and uHealth ISSN 2291-5222
This website uses cookies. By using this website, you consent to the use of cookies in accordance with the UCC Privacy and Cookies Statement. For more information about cookies and how you can disable them, visit our Privacy and Cookies statement