Suppr超能文献

13 种不同活动追踪器的计步结果:实验室和自由生活实验结果。

Step-count outcomes of 13 different activity trackers: Results from laboratory and free-living experiments.

机构信息

National Institutes of Biomedical Innovation, Health and Nutrition, Tokyo, Japan.

National Institutes of Biomedical Innovation, Health and Nutrition, Tokyo, Japan; Faculty of Sport and Health Science, Ritsumeikan University, Shiga, Japan.

出版信息

Gait Posture. 2022 Oct;98:24-33. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2022.08.004. Epub 2022 Aug 9.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Many activity trackers have been developed, but steps can still be inconsistent from one monitor to another.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What are the differences and associations between the steps of 13 selected consumer-based and research-grade wearable devices during 1 standardized day in a metabolic chamber and 15-day free-living trials?

METHODS

In total, 19 healthy adults between 21 and 50 years-old participated in this study. Participants were equipped with 12 accelerometer-based active trackers and one pedometer (Yamasa) in order to monitor the number of steps per day. The devices were worn on the waist (ActiGraph, Omron, Actimarker, Lifedorder, Withings, and Yamasa) or non-dominant wrist (Fitbit, Garmin, Misfit, EPSON, and Jawbone), or placed in a pocket (Omron CaloriScan, and TANITA). Participants performed structured activities over a 24 h period in a chamber (Standardized day), and steps were monitored in the same participants in free-living trials for 15 successive days using the same monitors (free-living days).

RESULTS

When the 13 monitors were ranked by their steps, waist-worn ActiGraph was located at the center (7th) of the monitors both in the Standardized (12,252 ± 598 steps/day, mean ± SD) and free-living days (9295 ± 4027 steps/day). The correlation between the accelerometer-based devices was very high (r = 0.87-0.99). However, the steps of Yamasa was significantly lower in both trials than ActiGraph. The wrist-worn accelerometers had significantly higher steps than other devices both trials (P < 0.05). The differences between ActiGraph and Actimarker or Lifecorder was less than 100 steps/day in the Standardized day, and the differences between ActiGraph and Active Style Pro was less than 100 steps/day in the free-living days. Regression equation was also performed for inter-device compatibility.

SIGNIFICANCE

Step obtained from the wrist-worn, waist-worn, and pocket-type activity trackers were significantly different from each other but still highly correlated in free-living conditions.

摘要

背景

已经开发出许多活动追踪器,但从一个监测器到另一个监测器,步数仍然可能不一致。

研究问题

在代谢室的 1 天标准化和 15 天自由生活试验中,13 种选定的基于消费者和研究级别的可穿戴设备的步数之间有哪些差异和关联?

方法

共有 19 名年龄在 21 至 50 岁之间的健康成年人参加了这项研究。参与者配备了 12 个基于加速度计的主动追踪器和一个计步器(Yamasa),以监测每天的步数。设备戴在腰部(ActiGraph、Omron、Actimarker、Lifedorder、Withings 和 Yamasa)或非优势手腕(Fitbit、Garmin、Misfit、EPSON 和 Jawbone),或放在口袋里(Omron CaloriScan 和 TANITA)。参与者在室内进行了 24 小时的结构化活动(标准化日),并在接下来的 15 天内使用相同的监测器(自由生活日)在相同的参与者中监测自由生活日的步数。

结果

当根据步数对 13 个监测器进行排名时,在标准化日(12252±598 步/天,平均值±SD)和自由生活日(9295±4027 步/天)中,腰部佩戴的 ActiGraph 位于监测器的中心(第 7 位)。加速度计设备之间的相关性非常高(r=0.87-0.99)。然而,在这两项试验中,Yamasa 的步数明显低于 ActiGraph。在这两项试验中,手腕佩戴的加速度计的步数都明显高于其他设备(P<0.05)。在标准化日,ActiGraph 和 Actimarker 或 Lifecorder 之间的差异小于 100 步/天,在自由生活日,ActiGraph 和 Active Style Pro 之间的差异小于 100 步/天。还为设备间的兼容性进行了回归方程。

意义

在自由生活条件下,从手腕佩戴、腰部佩戴和口袋式活动追踪器获得的步数彼此之间存在显著差异,但仍然高度相关。

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