File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Comparison of consumer and research monitors under semistructured settings

TitleComparison of consumer and research monitors under semistructured settings
Authors
KeywordsPhysical Activity
Wrist-Worn Monitors
Energy Expenditure
Free-Living
Issue Date2016
Citation
Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 2016, v. 48, n. 1, p. 151-158 How to Cite?
Abstract© Copyright 2015 by the American College of Sports Medicine. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited. Purpose: This study evaluated the relative validity of different consumer and research activity monitors during semistructured periods of sedentary activity, aerobic exercise, and resistance exercise. Methods: Fifty-two (28 male and 24 female) participants age 18-65 yr performed 20 min of self-selected sedentary activity, 25 min of aerobic exercise, and 25 min of resistance exercise, with 5 min of rest between each activity. Each participant wore five wrist-worn consumer monitors [Fitbit Flex, Jawbone Up24, Misfit Shine (MS), Nike+ Fuelband SE (NFS), and Polar Loop] and two research monitors [ActiGraph GT3X+ on the waist and BodyMedia Core (BMC) on the arm] while being concurrently monitored with Oxycon Mobile (OM), a portable metabolic measuring system. Energy expenditure (EE) on different activity sessions was measured by OM and estimated by all monitors. Results: Mean absolute percent error (MAPE) values for the full 80-min protocol ranged from 15.3% (BMC) to 30.4% (MS). EE estimates from ActiGraph GT3X+ were found to be equivalent to those from OM (T10% equivalence zone, 285.1-348.5). Correlations between OM and the various monitors were generally high (ranged between 0.71 and 0.90). Three monitors had MAPE values lower than 20% for sedentary activity: BMC (15.7%), MS (18.2%), and NFS (20.0%). Two monitors hadMAPE values lower than 20% for aerobic exercise: BMC (17.2%) and NFS (18.5%). None of the monitors had MAPE values lower than 25% for resistance exercise. Conclusion: Overall, the research monitors and Fitbit Flex, Jawbone Up24, and NFS provided reasonably accurate total EE estimates at the individual level. However, larger error was evident for individual activities, especially resistance exercise. Further research is needed to examine these monitors across various activities and intensities as well as under real-world conditions.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/267020
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 4.1
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.470
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBai, Yang-
dc.contributor.authorWelk, Gregory J.-
dc.contributor.authorNam, Yoon Ho-
dc.contributor.authorLee, Joey A.-
dc.contributor.authorLee, Jung Min-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Youngwon-
dc.contributor.authorMeier, Nathan F.-
dc.contributor.authorDixon, Philip M.-
dc.date.accessioned2019-01-31T07:20:16Z-
dc.date.available2019-01-31T07:20:16Z-
dc.date.issued2016-
dc.identifier.citationMedicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 2016, v. 48, n. 1, p. 151-158-
dc.identifier.issn0195-9131-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/267020-
dc.description.abstract© Copyright 2015 by the American College of Sports Medicine. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited. Purpose: This study evaluated the relative validity of different consumer and research activity monitors during semistructured periods of sedentary activity, aerobic exercise, and resistance exercise. Methods: Fifty-two (28 male and 24 female) participants age 18-65 yr performed 20 min of self-selected sedentary activity, 25 min of aerobic exercise, and 25 min of resistance exercise, with 5 min of rest between each activity. Each participant wore five wrist-worn consumer monitors [Fitbit Flex, Jawbone Up24, Misfit Shine (MS), Nike+ Fuelband SE (NFS), and Polar Loop] and two research monitors [ActiGraph GT3X+ on the waist and BodyMedia Core (BMC) on the arm] while being concurrently monitored with Oxycon Mobile (OM), a portable metabolic measuring system. Energy expenditure (EE) on different activity sessions was measured by OM and estimated by all monitors. Results: Mean absolute percent error (MAPE) values for the full 80-min protocol ranged from 15.3% (BMC) to 30.4% (MS). EE estimates from ActiGraph GT3X+ were found to be equivalent to those from OM (T10% equivalence zone, 285.1-348.5). Correlations between OM and the various monitors were generally high (ranged between 0.71 and 0.90). Three monitors had MAPE values lower than 20% for sedentary activity: BMC (15.7%), MS (18.2%), and NFS (20.0%). Two monitors hadMAPE values lower than 20% for aerobic exercise: BMC (17.2%) and NFS (18.5%). None of the monitors had MAPE values lower than 25% for resistance exercise. Conclusion: Overall, the research monitors and Fitbit Flex, Jawbone Up24, and NFS provided reasonably accurate total EE estimates at the individual level. However, larger error was evident for individual activities, especially resistance exercise. Further research is needed to examine these monitors across various activities and intensities as well as under real-world conditions.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofMedicine and Science in Sports and Exercise-
dc.subjectPhysical Activity-
dc.subjectWrist-Worn Monitors-
dc.subjectEnergy Expenditure-
dc.subjectFree-Living-
dc.titleComparison of consumer and research monitors under semistructured settings-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1249/MSS.0000000000000727-
dc.identifier.pmid26154336-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-84952332643-
dc.identifier.volume48-
dc.identifier.issue1-
dc.identifier.spage151-
dc.identifier.epage158-
dc.identifier.eissn1530-0315-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000366590100020-
dc.identifier.issnl0195-9131-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats