Agreement between Fitbit and ActiGraph Estimates of Physical Activity in Young Children.

IF 1.7 4区教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science Pub Date : 2023-01-01 Epub Date: 2022-09-19 DOI:10.1080/1091367x.2022.2125319

Michael D Schmidt, Stephen L Rathbun, Zhixuan Chu, Benjamin D Boudreaux, Lindsay Hahn, Eric Novotny, Kyle Johnsen, Sun Joo Grace Ahn

{"title":"Agreement between Fitbit and ActiGraph Estimates of Physical Activity in Young Children.","authors":"Michael D Schmidt, Stephen L Rathbun, Zhixuan Chu, Benjamin D Boudreaux, Lindsay Hahn, Eric Novotny, Kyle Johnsen, Sun Joo Grace Ahn","doi":"10.1080/1091367x.2022.2125319","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Physical activity (PA) estimates from the Fitbit Flex 2 were compared to those from the ActiGraph GT9X Link in 123 elementary school children. Steps and intensity-specific estimates of PA and 3-month PA change were calculated using two different ActiGraph cut-points (Evenson and Romanzini). Fitbit estimates were 35% higher for steps compared to the ActiGraph. Fitbit and ActiGraph intensity-specific estimates were closest for sedentary and light PA while estimates of moderate and vigorous PA varied substantially depending upon the ActiGraph cut-points used. Spearman correlations between device estimates were higher for steps (rs=.70) than for moderate (rs =.54 to .55) or vigorous (rs =.29 to .48) PA. There was low concordance between devices in assessing PA changes over time. Agreement between Fitbit Flex 2 and ActiGraph estimates may depend upon the cut-points used to classify PA intensity. However, there is fair to good agreement between devices in ranking children's steps and MVPA.","PeriodicalId":48577,"journal":{"name":"Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science","volume":"27 2","pages":"171-180"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10292760/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1091367x.2022.2125319","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/9/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Abstract

Physical activity (PA) estimates from the Fitbit Flex 2 were compared to those from the ActiGraph GT9X Link in 123 elementary school children. Steps and intensity-specific estimates of PA and 3-month PA change were calculated using two different ActiGraph cut-points (Evenson and Romanzini). Fitbit estimates were 35% higher for steps compared to the ActiGraph. Fitbit and ActiGraph intensity-specific estimates were closest for sedentary and light PA while estimates of moderate and vigorous PA varied substantially depending upon the ActiGraph cut-points used. Spearman correlations between device estimates were higher for steps (r_s=.70) than for moderate (r_s =.54 to .55) or vigorous (r_s =.29 to .48) PA. There was low concordance between devices in assessing PA changes over time. Agreement between Fitbit Flex 2 and ActiGraph estimates may depend upon the cut-points used to classify PA intensity. However, there is fair to good agreement between devices in ranking children's steps and MVPA.

查看原文本刊更多论文

Fitbit 和 ActiGraph 对幼儿体力活动的估计值之间的一致性。

将 Fitbit Flex 2 与 ActiGraph GT9X Link 对 123 名小学生的体力活动（PA）估计值进行了比较。使用两种不同的 ActiGraph 切点（Evenson 和 Romanzini）计算了特定步数和强度的运动量估计值以及 3 个月的运动量变化。与 ActiGraph 相比，Fitbit 估算的步数高出 35%。Fitbit 和 ActiGraph 对久坐和轻度活动量的特定强度估计值最为接近，而对中度和剧烈活动量的估计值则因所使用的 ActiGraph 切点不同而有很大差异。设备估计值之间的斯皮尔曼相关性在步数（rs=.70）方面高于中度（rs=.54 至 .55）或剧烈（rs=.29 至 .48）PA。在评估 PA 随时间的变化方面，设备之间的一致性较低。Fitbit Flex 2 和 ActiGraph 估计值之间的一致性可能取决于用于划分 PA 强度的切点。不过，在对儿童的步数和 MVPA 进行排名时，不同设备之间的一致性一般到较好。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

CiteScore

4.20

自引率

33.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： The scope of Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science (MPEES) covers original measurement research, special issues, and tutorials within six substantive disciplines of physical education and exercise science. Six of the seven sections of MPEES define the substantive disciplines within the purview of the original research to be published in the journal: Exercise Science, Physical Activity, Physical Education Pedagogy, Psychology, Research Methodology and Statistics, and Sport Management and Administration. The seventh section of MPEES, Tutorial and Teacher’s Toolbox, serves to provide an outlet for review and/or didactic manuscripts to be published in the journal. Special issues provide an avenue for a coherent set of manuscripts (e.g., four to five) to collectively focus in-depth on an important and timely measurement-related issue within the scope of MPEES. The primary aim of MPEES is to publish high-impact manuscripts, most of which will focus on original research, that fit within the scope of the journal.