Suppr超能文献

验证Fibit Zip™身体活动监测器作为自由生活状态下身体活动量度的有效性。

The validation of Fibit Zip™ physical activity monitor as a measure of free-living physical activity.

作者信息

Tully Mark A, McBride Cairmeal, Heron Leonnie, Hunter Ruth F

机构信息

Centre for Public Health, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queens' University Belfast, Belfast, UK.

出版信息

BMC Res Notes. 2014 Dec 23;7:952. doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-7-952.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The new generation of activity monitors allow users to upload their data to the internet and review progress. The aim of this study is to validate the Fitbit Zip as a measure of free-living physical activity.

FINDINGS

Participants wore a Fitbit Zip, ActiGraph GT3X accelerometer and a Yamax CW700 pedometer for seven days. Participants were asked their opinion on the utility of the Fitbit Zip. Validity was assessed by comparing the output using Spearman's rank correlation coefficients, Wilcoxon signed rank tests and Bland-Altman plots. 59.5% (25/47) of the cohort were female. There was a high correlation in steps/day between the Fitbit Zip and the two reference devices (r = 0.91, p < 0.001). No statistically significant difference between the Fitbit and Yamax steps/day was observed (Median (IQR) 7477 (3597) vs 6774 (3851); p = 0.11). The Fitbit measured significantly more steps/day than the Actigraph (7477 (3597) vs 6774 (3851); p < 0.001). Bland-Altman plots revealed no systematic differences between the devices.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the high level of correlation and no apparent systematic biases in the Bland Altman plots, the use of Fitbit Zip as a measure of physical activity. However the Fitbit Zip recorded a significantly higher number of steps per day than the Actigraph.

摘要

背景

新一代活动监测器允许用户将数据上传至互联网并查看进展情况。本研究的目的是验证Fitbit Zip作为日常身体活动测量工具的有效性。

研究结果

参与者佩戴Fitbit Zip、ActiGraph GT3X加速度计和Yamax CW700计步器七天。询问参与者对Fitbit Zip实用性的看法。通过使用Spearman等级相关系数、Wilcoxon符号秩检验和Bland-Altman图比较输出结果来评估有效性。该队列中59.5%(25/47)为女性。Fitbit Zip与另外两种参考设备之间的每日步数具有高度相关性(r = 0.91,p < 0.001)。未观察到Fitbit与Yamax每日步数之间存在统计学显著差异(中位数(四分位间距)7477(3597)对6774(3851);p = 0.11)。Fitbit测量的每日步数显著多于Actigraph(7477(3597)对6774(3851);p < 0.001)。Bland-Altman图显示各设备之间无系统差异。

结论

鉴于相关性较高且Bland Altman图中无明显系统偏差,Fitbit Zip可作为身体活动的一种测量工具。然而,Fitbit Zip记录的每日步数明显高于Actigraph。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/69d8/4307145/3c2d77d26e41/13104_2014_3453_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验