Review



fitbit zip  (ProMIS Neurosciences)

 
  • Logo
  • About
  • News
  • Press Release
  • Team
  • Advisors
  • Partners
  • Contact
  • Bioz Stars
  • Bioz vStars
    • 90
      Buy from Supplier

    Structured Review

    ProMIS Neurosciences fitbit zip
    Fitbit Zip, supplied by ProMIS Neurosciences, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/fitbit+zip/fitbit+zip/pmc10416803-13-34-79
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    fitbit zip - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    90/100 stars

    Images

    Related Articles

    Activity Assay:

    Article Title: Mobile Apps and Quality of Life in Patients With Breast Cancer and Survivors: Systematic Literature Review
    Article Snippet: , Nápoles et al [ ], 2019 , Feasibility study , United States; 23 Spanish-speaking breast cancer survivors who completed primary treatment within 1 year , A Spanish language mHealth app, trackC, with integrated activity tracker (Fitbit Zip), a hard copy survivor care planning program and information booklet, and health coaching telephone calls; the app provided information on potential side effects, healthy lifestyles, and survivorship resources; intervention duration: 2 months; no follow-up , Primary measurements: adapted version of the PROMIS x Cancer Fatigue Scale, adapted version of the MOS y Health Distress Scale, knowledge of cancer questionnaires, and an 8-item self-efficacy scale; secondary measurements: the 6-item Emotional Well-Being Scale from the Functional Assessment of Cancer Treatment-General, the Patient Health Questionnaire (8-item version), and the 6-item Brief Symptom Inventory Somatization Scale , N/A z , Fatigue ( P =.02) and health distress ( P =.01) levels were lower, self-reported knowledge of cancer care and resources increased ( P =.03), and emotional well-being ( P =.02) and daily steps ( P =.02) increased; no change was found in the other secondary measurements or in self-efficacy.

    Functional Assay:

    Article Title: Mobile Apps and Quality of Life in Patients With Breast Cancer and Survivors: Systematic Literature Review
    Article Snippet: , Nápoles et al [ ], 2019 , Feasibility study , United States; 23 Spanish-speaking breast cancer survivors who completed primary treatment within 1 year , A Spanish language mHealth app, trackC, with integrated activity tracker (Fitbit Zip), a hard copy survivor care planning program and information booklet, and health coaching telephone calls; the app provided information on potential side effects, healthy lifestyles, and survivorship resources; intervention duration: 2 months; no follow-up , Primary measurements: adapted version of the PROMIS x Cancer Fatigue Scale, adapted version of the MOS y Health Distress Scale, knowledge of cancer questionnaires, and an 8-item self-efficacy scale; secondary measurements: the 6-item Emotional Well-Being Scale from the Functional Assessment of Cancer Treatment-General, the Patient Health Questionnaire (8-item version), and the 6-item Brief Symptom Inventory Somatization Scale , N/A z , Fatigue ( P =.02) and health distress ( P =.01) levels were lower, self-reported knowledge of cancer care and resources increased ( P =.03), and emotional well-being ( P =.02) and daily steps ( P =.02) increased; no change was found in the other secondary measurements or in self-efficacy.



    Similar Products

    fitbit zip  (Garmin Ltd)
    86
    Garmin Ltd fitbit zip
    Fitbit Zip, supplied by Garmin Ltd, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 86/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/fitbit+zip/fitbit+zip/10__3390_slash_app14177451-323-9-11
    Average 86 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    fitbit zip - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    86/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier
    wearables fitbit one/zip  (ActiGraph llc)
    90
    ActiGraph llc wearables fitbit one/zip
    Wearables Fitbit One/Zip, supplied by ActiGraph llc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/fitbit+zip/actigraph+gt3x/pm37688071-392-24-27
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    wearables fitbit one/zip - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    90/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier
    fitbit one/zip  (ActiGraph llc)
    90
    ActiGraph llc fitbit one/zip
    Design, settings and aims of studies included in the systematic review.
    Fitbit One/Zip, supplied by ActiGraph llc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/fitbit+zip/actigraph+gt3x/pmc10490754-199-24-27
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    fitbit one/zip - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    90/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier
    fitbit zip  (MyFitnessPal Inc)
    90
    MyFitnessPal Inc fitbit zip
    Design, settings and aims of studies included in the systematic review.
    Fitbit Zip, supplied by MyFitnessPal Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/fitbit+zip/fitbit+zip/pmc10909435__OBR___24___e13561___s001-162-10-19
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    fitbit zip - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    90/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier
    fitbit zip  (ActiGraph llc)
    90
    ActiGraph llc fitbit zip
    Design, settings and aims of studies included in the systematic review.
    Fitbit Zip, supplied by ActiGraph llc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/fitbit+zip/fitbit+zip/pmc10196895__mhealth_v11i1e43162_app5-616-26-36
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    fitbit zip - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    90/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier
    fitbit zip  (ProMIS Neurosciences)
    90
    ProMIS Neurosciences fitbit zip
    Design, settings and aims of studies included in the systematic review.
    Fitbit Zip, supplied by ProMIS Neurosciences, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/fitbit+zip/fitbit+zip/pmc10416803-13-34-79
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    fitbit zip - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    90/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier
    fitbit zip  (StepsCount Inc)
    90
    StepsCount Inc fitbit zip
    Mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) across walking speeds presented by age group. Participants walked on a treadmill for 5-min bouts beginning at 0.8 km/h (0.5 mph) and increasing in 0.8 km/h (0.5 mph). MAPE (%) was computed for each person bout subtracting the directly observed steps (criterion measurement) from the wearable technology-derived steps and dividing it in absolute value by the directly observed steps. Black dots represent the averaged MAPE across specific age group for a given speed. Bars represent standard deviation of MAPE. The standard deviation bars were not drawn when they were shorter than the height of the symbol. Lower MAPE values indicate higher age group accuracy. All age groups (21–85 years) wore the Actical ( N = 250), ActiGraph GT9X (Waist) ( N = 254), ActiGraph GT9X (Wrist) ( N = 254), activPAL ( N = <t>249),</t> <t>Digi-Walker</t> SW-200 ( N = 258), GENEActiv (Waist) ( N = 224), GENEActiv (Wrist) ( N = 217), NL-1000 ( N = 258), and the StepWatch ( N = 253). Young Adults (21–40 years) also wore the <t>Fitbit</t> One ( N = 80) and Garmin vivofit 2 ( N = 80). Middle-Age Adults (41–60 years) also wore the Apple Watch Series 1 ( N = 76), Fitbit One ( N = 80), Garmin vivoactive HR ( N = 77), Garmin vivofit 3 ( N = 77), and the Samsung Gear Fit2 ( N = 80). Older Adults (61–85 years) also wore the AppleWatch Series 1 ( N = 98), Fitbit Ionic ( N = 98), Fitbit Zip ( N = 98), Garmin vivoactive 3 ( N = 96), PiezoRx ( N = 98), Polar M600 ( N = 97), and the Samsung Gear Fit2 Pro ( N = 98). See Additional file for a graphical classification of wearable technologies by age groups. See Additional File : Suppl Table 2 for a tabular description of validity indices by age groups
    Fitbit Zip, supplied by StepsCount Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/fitbit+zip/fitbit+zip/pmc09461139-81-100-104
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    fitbit zip - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    90/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier

    Image Search Results


    Design, settings and aims of studies included in the systematic review.

    Journal: Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)

    Article Title: Physical Activity in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: Which Real-World Accelerometry Measures Are Robust? A Systematic Review

    doi: 10.3390/s23177615

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Design, settings and aims of studies included in the systematic review.

    Article Snippet: Criterion validity between research-grade wearables and consumer-grade wearables was excellent for step counts measured at the right hip: ICC = 0.94 (95%CI [0.88, 0.97]) (FitBit One/Zip versus ActiGraph GT3X+) [ ] and the waist: ICC = 0.96 (95%CI [0.91, 0.99]) (Misfit Shine versus ActiGraph GT3X+) [ ] and ICC = 0.91 (95%CI [0.79, 0.97]) (NL2000i) [ ], but lower on the wrist: ICC ranged from ICC = 0.83 (95%CI [0.59, 0.93]) (Misfit Shine versus NL2000i) to ICC = 0.86 (95%CI [0.67, 0.94]) (Misfit Shine versus ActiGraph GT3X+) [ ].

    Techniques: Activity Assay, Biomarker Discovery, Adhesive, Medications, Selection

    Clinimetric properties and methods of studies included in the systematic review.

    Journal: Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)

    Article Title: Physical Activity in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: Which Real-World Accelerometry Measures Are Robust? A Systematic Review

    doi: 10.3390/s23177615

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Clinimetric properties and methods of studies included in the systematic review.

    Article Snippet: Criterion validity between research-grade wearables and consumer-grade wearables was excellent for step counts measured at the right hip: ICC = 0.94 (95%CI [0.88, 0.97]) (FitBit One/Zip versus ActiGraph GT3X+) [ ] and the waist: ICC = 0.96 (95%CI [0.91, 0.99]) (Misfit Shine versus ActiGraph GT3X+) [ ] and ICC = 0.91 (95%CI [0.79, 0.97]) (NL2000i) [ ], but lower on the wrist: ICC ranged from ICC = 0.83 (95%CI [0.59, 0.93]) (Misfit Shine versus NL2000i) to ICC = 0.86 (95%CI [0.67, 0.94]) (Misfit Shine versus ActiGraph GT3X+) [ ].

    Techniques: Activity Assay, Construct, Sequencing, Biomarker Discovery

    Mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) across walking speeds presented by age group. Participants walked on a treadmill for 5-min bouts beginning at 0.8 km/h (0.5 mph) and increasing in 0.8 km/h (0.5 mph). MAPE (%) was computed for each person bout subtracting the directly observed steps (criterion measurement) from the wearable technology-derived steps and dividing it in absolute value by the directly observed steps. Black dots represent the averaged MAPE across specific age group for a given speed. Bars represent standard deviation of MAPE. The standard deviation bars were not drawn when they were shorter than the height of the symbol. Lower MAPE values indicate higher age group accuracy. All age groups (21–85 years) wore the Actical ( N = 250), ActiGraph GT9X (Waist) ( N = 254), ActiGraph GT9X (Wrist) ( N = 254), activPAL ( N = 249), Digi-Walker SW-200 ( N = 258), GENEActiv (Waist) ( N = 224), GENEActiv (Wrist) ( N = 217), NL-1000 ( N = 258), and the StepWatch ( N = 253). Young Adults (21–40 years) also wore the Fitbit One ( N = 80) and Garmin vivofit 2 ( N = 80). Middle-Age Adults (41–60 years) also wore the Apple Watch Series 1 ( N = 76), Fitbit One ( N = 80), Garmin vivoactive HR ( N = 77), Garmin vivofit 3 ( N = 77), and the Samsung Gear Fit2 ( N = 80). Older Adults (61–85 years) also wore the AppleWatch Series 1 ( N = 98), Fitbit Ionic ( N = 98), Fitbit Zip ( N = 98), Garmin vivoactive 3 ( N = 96), PiezoRx ( N = 98), Polar M600 ( N = 97), and the Samsung Gear Fit2 Pro ( N = 98). See Additional file for a graphical classification of wearable technologies by age groups. See Additional File : Suppl Table 2 for a tabular description of validity indices by age groups

    Journal: The International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

    Article Title: A catalog of validity indices for step counting wearable technologies during treadmill walking: the CADENCE-adults study

    doi: 10.1186/s12966-022-01350-9

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) across walking speeds presented by age group. Participants walked on a treadmill for 5-min bouts beginning at 0.8 km/h (0.5 mph) and increasing in 0.8 km/h (0.5 mph). MAPE (%) was computed for each person bout subtracting the directly observed steps (criterion measurement) from the wearable technology-derived steps and dividing it in absolute value by the directly observed steps. Black dots represent the averaged MAPE across specific age group for a given speed. Bars represent standard deviation of MAPE. The standard deviation bars were not drawn when they were shorter than the height of the symbol. Lower MAPE values indicate higher age group accuracy. All age groups (21–85 years) wore the Actical ( N = 250), ActiGraph GT9X (Waist) ( N = 254), ActiGraph GT9X (Wrist) ( N = 254), activPAL ( N = 249), Digi-Walker SW-200 ( N = 258), GENEActiv (Waist) ( N = 224), GENEActiv (Wrist) ( N = 217), NL-1000 ( N = 258), and the StepWatch ( N = 253). Young Adults (21–40 years) also wore the Fitbit One ( N = 80) and Garmin vivofit 2 ( N = 80). Middle-Age Adults (41–60 years) also wore the Apple Watch Series 1 ( N = 76), Fitbit One ( N = 80), Garmin vivoactive HR ( N = 77), Garmin vivofit 3 ( N = 77), and the Samsung Gear Fit2 ( N = 80). Older Adults (61–85 years) also wore the AppleWatch Series 1 ( N = 98), Fitbit Ionic ( N = 98), Fitbit Zip ( N = 98), Garmin vivoactive 3 ( N = 96), PiezoRx ( N = 98), Polar M600 ( N = 97), and the Samsung Gear Fit2 Pro ( N = 98). See Additional file for a graphical classification of wearable technologies by age groups. See Additional File : Suppl Table 2 for a tabular description of validity indices by age groups

    Article Snippet: See Additional file : Suppl Fig. 1 and Suppl Table 1 for visual and tabular description of device locations, settings, distribution among age groups, and initialization and data extraction procedures: StepWatch (OrthoCare Innovations, Seattle, WA, USA) on the right ankle; an activPAL (PAL Technologies Ltd, Glasgow, UK) on the right thigh; an Actical (Philips Respironics, Murrysville, PA, USA), ActiGraph GT9X (ActiGraph, Pensacola, FL, USA), GENEActiv (Activinsights Ltd, Cambridgeshire, UK), New Lifestyles NL-1000 (New Lifestyles Inc., Lee’s Summit, MO, USA) and Fitbit One (Fitbit Inc, San Francisco, CA, USA) on the right waist, and a Digi-Walker SW-200 (Yamax Corporation, Tokyo, Japan), Fitbit Zip and PiezoRx (StepsCount, Ontario, Canada) on the left waist; an ActiGraph GT9X, Garmin vivoactive 3 (Garmin International Inc., Olathe, KS, USA), Garmin vivoactive HR, Garmin vivofit 2, Garmin vivofit 3, GENEActiv and Polar M600 (Polar Electro Oy, Kempele, Finland) on the non-dominant wrist, and an Apple Watch Series 1 (Apple Inc., Cupertino, CA USA), Fitbit Ionic (Fitbit Inc, San Francisco, CA, USA), Samsung Gear Fit2 (Samsung Electronics America Inc., Ridgefield Park, NJ, USA) and Samsung Gear Fit2 Pro on the dominant wrist.

    Techniques: Derivative Assay, Standard Deviation

    Effect of wear location on overall accuracy (mean absolute percentage error, MAPE) of wearable technologies’ step counting ability. MAPE and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs; estimated using mixed effect models) of each wear location are presented at slow, normal, and fast walking speeds. Slow speed bouts: 0.8, 1.6, 2.4, 3.2 km/h (0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 mph); normal speed bouts: 4.0, 4.8, 5.6, 6.4 km/h (2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4.0 mph); fast speed bouts: 7.2, 8.0 km/h (4.5, 5.0 mph). MAPE values were averaged across devices respective to each wear location for slow, normal, and fast walking speeds. MAPE values closer to 0 indicate greater accuracy. The 95% CIs bars were not drawn when they were shorter than the height of the symbol. Further, where 95% CIs do not overlap, there are significant differences between locations. Likelihood ratio test P value is reported for the effect of wear location on MAPE for each specific speed level. Ankle-worn wearable: StepWatch ( N = 253). Thigh-worn wearable: activPAL ( N = 249). Waist-worn wearables: Actical ( N = 250), ActiGraph GT9X ( N = 254), Digi-Walker SW-200 ( N = 258), Fitbit One ( N = 160), Fitbit Zip ( N = 98), GENEActiv ( N = 224), NL-1000 ( N = 258), PiezoRx ( N = 98). Wrist-worn wearables: ActiGraph GT9X ( N = 254), Apple Watch Series 1 ( N = 174), Fitbit Ionic ( N = 98), Garmin vivoactive 3 ( N = 96), Garmin vivoactive HR ( N = 77), Garmin vivofit 2 ( N = 80), Garmin vivofit 3 ( N = 77), GENEActiv ( N = 217), Polar M600 ( N = 97), Samsung Gear Fit2 ( N = 80), Samsung Gear Fit2 Pro ( N = 98). See Additional file for a graphical classification of wearable technologies by age groups

    Journal: The International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

    Article Title: A catalog of validity indices for step counting wearable technologies during treadmill walking: the CADENCE-adults study

    doi: 10.1186/s12966-022-01350-9

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Effect of wear location on overall accuracy (mean absolute percentage error, MAPE) of wearable technologies’ step counting ability. MAPE and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs; estimated using mixed effect models) of each wear location are presented at slow, normal, and fast walking speeds. Slow speed bouts: 0.8, 1.6, 2.4, 3.2 km/h (0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 mph); normal speed bouts: 4.0, 4.8, 5.6, 6.4 km/h (2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4.0 mph); fast speed bouts: 7.2, 8.0 km/h (4.5, 5.0 mph). MAPE values were averaged across devices respective to each wear location for slow, normal, and fast walking speeds. MAPE values closer to 0 indicate greater accuracy. The 95% CIs bars were not drawn when they were shorter than the height of the symbol. Further, where 95% CIs do not overlap, there are significant differences between locations. Likelihood ratio test P value is reported for the effect of wear location on MAPE for each specific speed level. Ankle-worn wearable: StepWatch ( N = 253). Thigh-worn wearable: activPAL ( N = 249). Waist-worn wearables: Actical ( N = 250), ActiGraph GT9X ( N = 254), Digi-Walker SW-200 ( N = 258), Fitbit One ( N = 160), Fitbit Zip ( N = 98), GENEActiv ( N = 224), NL-1000 ( N = 258), PiezoRx ( N = 98). Wrist-worn wearables: ActiGraph GT9X ( N = 254), Apple Watch Series 1 ( N = 174), Fitbit Ionic ( N = 98), Garmin vivoactive 3 ( N = 96), Garmin vivoactive HR ( N = 77), Garmin vivofit 2 ( N = 80), Garmin vivofit 3 ( N = 77), GENEActiv ( N = 217), Polar M600 ( N = 97), Samsung Gear Fit2 ( N = 80), Samsung Gear Fit2 Pro ( N = 98). See Additional file for a graphical classification of wearable technologies by age groups

    Article Snippet: See Additional file : Suppl Fig. 1 and Suppl Table 1 for visual and tabular description of device locations, settings, distribution among age groups, and initialization and data extraction procedures: StepWatch (OrthoCare Innovations, Seattle, WA, USA) on the right ankle; an activPAL (PAL Technologies Ltd, Glasgow, UK) on the right thigh; an Actical (Philips Respironics, Murrysville, PA, USA), ActiGraph GT9X (ActiGraph, Pensacola, FL, USA), GENEActiv (Activinsights Ltd, Cambridgeshire, UK), New Lifestyles NL-1000 (New Lifestyles Inc., Lee’s Summit, MO, USA) and Fitbit One (Fitbit Inc, San Francisco, CA, USA) on the right waist, and a Digi-Walker SW-200 (Yamax Corporation, Tokyo, Japan), Fitbit Zip and PiezoRx (StepsCount, Ontario, Canada) on the left waist; an ActiGraph GT9X, Garmin vivoactive 3 (Garmin International Inc., Olathe, KS, USA), Garmin vivoactive HR, Garmin vivofit 2, Garmin vivofit 3, GENEActiv and Polar M600 (Polar Electro Oy, Kempele, Finland) on the non-dominant wrist, and an Apple Watch Series 1 (Apple Inc., Cupertino, CA USA), Fitbit Ionic (Fitbit Inc, San Francisco, CA, USA), Samsung Gear Fit2 (Samsung Electronics America Inc., Ridgefield Park, NJ, USA) and Samsung Gear Fit2 Pro on the dominant wrist.

    Techniques:

    Effect of age on overall accuracy (mean absolute percentage error, MAPE) of wearable technologies’ step counting ability. MAPE and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs; estimated using mixed effect models) of each age group are presented at slow, normal, and fast walking speeds. MAPE values were averaged across devices respective to each age group for slow, normal, and fast walking speeds. Slow speed bouts: 0.8, 1.6, 2.4, 3.2 km/h (0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 mph); normal speed bouts: 4.0, 4.8, 5.6, 6.4 km/h (2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4.0 mph); fast speed bouts: 7.2, 8.0 km/h (4.5, 5.0 mph). MAPE values closer to 0 represent greater accuracy. The 95% CIs bars were not drawn when they were shorter than the height of the symbol. Further, where 95% CIs do not overlap, there are significant differences between locations. Likelihood ratio test P value is reported for the effect of age on MAPE for each specific speed level. All age groups (21–85 years) wore the Actical ( N = 250), ActiGraph GT9X (Waist) ( N = 254), ActiGraph GT9X (Wrist) ( N = 254), activPAL ( N = 249), Digi-Walker SW-200 ( N = 258), GENEActiv (Waist) ( N = 224), GENEActiv (Wrist) ( N = 217), NL-1000 ( N = 258), and the StepWatch ( N = 253). Young Adults (21–40 years) also wore the Fitbit One ( N = 80) and Garmin vivofit 2 ( N = 80). Middle-Age Adults (41–60 years) also wore the Apple Watch Series 1 ( N = 76), Fitbit One ( N = 80), Garmin vivoactive HR ( N = 77), Garmin vivofit 3 ( N = 77), and the Samsung Gear Fit2 ( N = 80). Older Adults (61–85 years) also wore the AppleWatch Series 1 ( N = 98), Fitbit Ionic ( N = 98), Fitbit Zip ( N = 98), Garmin vivoactive 3 ( N = 96), PiezoRx ( N = 98), Polar M600 ( N = 97), and the Samsung Gear Fit2 Pro ( N = 98). See Additional file for a graphical classification of wearable technologies by age groups

    Journal: The International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

    Article Title: A catalog of validity indices for step counting wearable technologies during treadmill walking: the CADENCE-adults study

    doi: 10.1186/s12966-022-01350-9

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Effect of age on overall accuracy (mean absolute percentage error, MAPE) of wearable technologies’ step counting ability. MAPE and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs; estimated using mixed effect models) of each age group are presented at slow, normal, and fast walking speeds. MAPE values were averaged across devices respective to each age group for slow, normal, and fast walking speeds. Slow speed bouts: 0.8, 1.6, 2.4, 3.2 km/h (0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 mph); normal speed bouts: 4.0, 4.8, 5.6, 6.4 km/h (2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4.0 mph); fast speed bouts: 7.2, 8.0 km/h (4.5, 5.0 mph). MAPE values closer to 0 represent greater accuracy. The 95% CIs bars were not drawn when they were shorter than the height of the symbol. Further, where 95% CIs do not overlap, there are significant differences between locations. Likelihood ratio test P value is reported for the effect of age on MAPE for each specific speed level. All age groups (21–85 years) wore the Actical ( N = 250), ActiGraph GT9X (Waist) ( N = 254), ActiGraph GT9X (Wrist) ( N = 254), activPAL ( N = 249), Digi-Walker SW-200 ( N = 258), GENEActiv (Waist) ( N = 224), GENEActiv (Wrist) ( N = 217), NL-1000 ( N = 258), and the StepWatch ( N = 253). Young Adults (21–40 years) also wore the Fitbit One ( N = 80) and Garmin vivofit 2 ( N = 80). Middle-Age Adults (41–60 years) also wore the Apple Watch Series 1 ( N = 76), Fitbit One ( N = 80), Garmin vivoactive HR ( N = 77), Garmin vivofit 3 ( N = 77), and the Samsung Gear Fit2 ( N = 80). Older Adults (61–85 years) also wore the AppleWatch Series 1 ( N = 98), Fitbit Ionic ( N = 98), Fitbit Zip ( N = 98), Garmin vivoactive 3 ( N = 96), PiezoRx ( N = 98), Polar M600 ( N = 97), and the Samsung Gear Fit2 Pro ( N = 98). See Additional file for a graphical classification of wearable technologies by age groups

    Article Snippet: See Additional file : Suppl Fig. 1 and Suppl Table 1 for visual and tabular description of device locations, settings, distribution among age groups, and initialization and data extraction procedures: StepWatch (OrthoCare Innovations, Seattle, WA, USA) on the right ankle; an activPAL (PAL Technologies Ltd, Glasgow, UK) on the right thigh; an Actical (Philips Respironics, Murrysville, PA, USA), ActiGraph GT9X (ActiGraph, Pensacola, FL, USA), GENEActiv (Activinsights Ltd, Cambridgeshire, UK), New Lifestyles NL-1000 (New Lifestyles Inc., Lee’s Summit, MO, USA) and Fitbit One (Fitbit Inc, San Francisco, CA, USA) on the right waist, and a Digi-Walker SW-200 (Yamax Corporation, Tokyo, Japan), Fitbit Zip and PiezoRx (StepsCount, Ontario, Canada) on the left waist; an ActiGraph GT9X, Garmin vivoactive 3 (Garmin International Inc., Olathe, KS, USA), Garmin vivoactive HR, Garmin vivofit 2, Garmin vivofit 3, GENEActiv and Polar M600 (Polar Electro Oy, Kempele, Finland) on the non-dominant wrist, and an Apple Watch Series 1 (Apple Inc., Cupertino, CA USA), Fitbit Ionic (Fitbit Inc, San Francisco, CA, USA), Samsung Gear Fit2 (Samsung Electronics America Inc., Ridgefield Park, NJ, USA) and Samsung Gear Fit2 Pro on the dominant wrist.

    Techniques: