File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Concurrent validity of the Fitbit for assessing sedentary behavior and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity

TitleConcurrent validity of the Fitbit for assessing sedentary behavior and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity
Authors
KeywordsAccelerometer
Physical activity
Public health
Sedentary behavior
Validity
Issue Date2019
PublisherBioMed Central Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.biomedcentral.com/bmcmedresmethodol/
Citation
BMC Medical Research Methodology, 2019, v. 19, article no. 29, p. 1-9 How to Cite?
AbstractBackground: Recent advances in sensor technologies have promoted the use of consumer-based accelerometers such as Fitbit Flex in epidemiological and clinical research; however, the validity of the Fitbit Flex in measuring sedentary behavior (SED) and physical activity (PA) has not been fully determined against previously validated research-grade accelerometers such as ActiGraph GT3X+. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the concurrent validity of the Fitbit Flex against ActiGraph GT3X+ in a free-living condition. Methods: A total of 65 participants (age: M = 42, SD = 14 years, female: 72%) each wore a Fitbit Flex and GT3X+ for seven consecutive days. After excluding sleep and non-wear time, time spent (min/day) in SED and moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) were estimated using various cut-points for GT3X+ and brand-specific algorithms for Fitbit, respectively. Repeated measures one-way ANOVA and mean absolute percent errors (MAPE) served to examine differences and measurement errors in SED and MVPA estimates between Fitbit Flex and GT3X+, respectively. Pearson and Spearman correlations and Bland-Altman (BA) plots were used to evaluate the association and potential systematic bias between Fitbit Flex and GT3X+. PROC MIXED procedure in SAS was used to examine the equivalence (i.e., the 90% confidence interval with ±10% equivalence zone) between the devices. Results: Fitbit Flex produced similar SED and low MAPE (mean difference [MD] = 37 min/day, P = .21, MAPE = 6.8%), but significantly higher MVPA and relatively large MAPE (MD = 59–77 min/day, P < .0001, MAPE = 56.6–74.3%) compared with the estimates from GT3X+ using three different cut-points. The correlations between Fitbit Flex and GT3X+ were consistently higher for SED (r = 0.90, ρ = 0.86, P < .01), but weaker for MVPA (r = 0.65–0.76, ρ = 0.69–0.79, P < .01). BA plots revealed that there is no apparent bias in estimating SED. Conclusion: In comparison with the GT3X+ accelerometer, the Fitbit Flex provided comparatively accurate estimates of SED, but the Fitbit Flex overestimated MVPA under free-living conditions. Future investigations using the Fitbit Flex should be aware of present findings.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/267460
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 3.9
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.632
PubMed Central ID
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorRedenius, N-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Y-
dc.contributor.authorByun, W-
dc.date.accessioned2019-02-18T09:02:31Z-
dc.date.available2019-02-18T09:02:31Z-
dc.date.issued2019-
dc.identifier.citationBMC Medical Research Methodology, 2019, v. 19, article no. 29, p. 1-9-
dc.identifier.issn1471-2288-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/267460-
dc.description.abstractBackground: Recent advances in sensor technologies have promoted the use of consumer-based accelerometers such as Fitbit Flex in epidemiological and clinical research; however, the validity of the Fitbit Flex in measuring sedentary behavior (SED) and physical activity (PA) has not been fully determined against previously validated research-grade accelerometers such as ActiGraph GT3X+. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the concurrent validity of the Fitbit Flex against ActiGraph GT3X+ in a free-living condition. Methods: A total of 65 participants (age: M = 42, SD = 14 years, female: 72%) each wore a Fitbit Flex and GT3X+ for seven consecutive days. After excluding sleep and non-wear time, time spent (min/day) in SED and moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) were estimated using various cut-points for GT3X+ and brand-specific algorithms for Fitbit, respectively. Repeated measures one-way ANOVA and mean absolute percent errors (MAPE) served to examine differences and measurement errors in SED and MVPA estimates between Fitbit Flex and GT3X+, respectively. Pearson and Spearman correlations and Bland-Altman (BA) plots were used to evaluate the association and potential systematic bias between Fitbit Flex and GT3X+. PROC MIXED procedure in SAS was used to examine the equivalence (i.e., the 90% confidence interval with ±10% equivalence zone) between the devices. Results: Fitbit Flex produced similar SED and low MAPE (mean difference [MD] = 37 min/day, P = .21, MAPE = 6.8%), but significantly higher MVPA and relatively large MAPE (MD = 59–77 min/day, P < .0001, MAPE = 56.6–74.3%) compared with the estimates from GT3X+ using three different cut-points. The correlations between Fitbit Flex and GT3X+ were consistently higher for SED (r = 0.90, ρ = 0.86, P < .01), but weaker for MVPA (r = 0.65–0.76, ρ = 0.69–0.79, P < .01). BA plots revealed that there is no apparent bias in estimating SED. Conclusion: In comparison with the GT3X+ accelerometer, the Fitbit Flex provided comparatively accurate estimates of SED, but the Fitbit Flex overestimated MVPA under free-living conditions. Future investigations using the Fitbit Flex should be aware of present findings.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherBioMed Central Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.biomedcentral.com/bmcmedresmethodol/-
dc.relation.ispartofBMC Medical Research Methodology-
dc.rightsBMC Medical Research Methodology. Copyright © BioMed Central Ltd.-
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.-
dc.subjectAccelerometer-
dc.subjectPhysical activity-
dc.subjectPublic health-
dc.subjectSedentary behavior-
dc.subjectValidity-
dc.titleConcurrent validity of the Fitbit for assessing sedentary behavior and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.emailKim, Y: youngwon@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authorityKim, Y=rp02498-
dc.description.naturepublished_or_final_version-
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12874-019-0668-1-
dc.identifier.pmid30732582-
dc.identifier.pmcidPMC6367836-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85061246462-
dc.identifier.hkuros296974-
dc.identifier.volume19-
dc.identifier.spagearticle no. 29, p. 1-
dc.identifier.epagearticle no. 29, p. 9-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000458142600001-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdom-
dc.identifier.issnl1471-2288-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats