1
|
Fuller D, Colwell E, Low J, Orychock K, Tobin MA, Simango B, Buote R, Van Heerden D, Luan H, Cullen K, Slade L, Taylor NGA. Reliability and Validity of Commercially Available Wearable Devices for Measuring Steps, Energy Expenditure, and Heart Rate: Systematic Review. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2020; 8:e18694. [PMID: 32897239 PMCID: PMC7509623 DOI: 10.2196/18694] [Citation(s) in RCA: 209] [Impact Index Per Article: 52.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2020] [Revised: 06/22/2020] [Accepted: 06/25/2020] [Indexed: 12/27/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Consumer-wearable activity trackers are small electronic devices that record fitness and health-related measures. Objective The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the validity and reliability of commercial wearables in measuring step count, heart rate, and energy expenditure. Methods We identified devices to be included in the review. Database searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, and SPORTDiscus, and only articles published in the English language up to May 2019 were considered. Studies were excluded if they did not identify the device used and if they did not examine the validity or reliability of the device. Studies involving the general population and all special populations were included. We operationalized validity as criterion validity (as compared with other measures) and construct validity (degree to which the device is measuring what it claims). Reliability measures focused on intradevice and interdevice reliability. Results We included 158 publications examining nine different commercial wearable device brands. Fitbit was by far the most studied brand. In laboratory-based settings, Fitbit, Apple Watch, and Samsung appeared to measure steps accurately. Heart rate measurement was more variable, with Apple Watch and Garmin being the most accurate and Fitbit tending toward underestimation. For energy expenditure, no brand was accurate. We also examined validity between devices within a specific brand. Conclusions Commercial wearable devices are accurate for measuring steps and heart rate in laboratory-based settings, but this varies by the manufacturer and device type. Devices are constantly being upgraded and redesigned to new models, suggesting the need for more current reviews and research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel Fuller
- School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University, St. John's, NL, Canada.,Department of Computer Science, Memorial University, St. John's, NL, Canada.,Division of Community Health and Humanities, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St. John's, NL, Canada
| | - Emily Colwell
- School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University, St. John's, NL, Canada
| | - Jonathan Low
- School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University, St. John's, NL, Canada
| | - Kassia Orychock
- School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University, St. John's, NL, Canada
| | | | - Bo Simango
- School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University, St. John's, NL, Canada
| | - Richard Buote
- Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St. John's, NL, Canada
| | | | - Hui Luan
- Department of Geography, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, United States
| | - Kimberley Cullen
- School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University, St. John's, NL, Canada.,Division of Community Health and Humanities, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St. John's, NL, Canada
| | - Logan Slade
- Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St. John's, NL, Canada
| | - Nathan G A Taylor
- School of Health Administration, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
| |
Collapse
|