Publication | Open Access
Comparing Methods to Identify Wear-Time Intervals for Physical Activity With the Fitbit Charge 2
22
Citations
34
References
2020
Year
Valid Wear TimeFitness TrackingWear-time IntervalsPhysical ActivityWearable SystemAccelerometerWearable TechnologyEducationKinesiologyBody CompositionExercisePhysical ExerciseApplied PhysiologyBiostatisticsPhysical Activity TrackersHealth SciencesHeart Rate DataPhysical FitnessFitbit Charge 2Exercise SciencePhysical Activity EpidemiologyExercise PhysiologyHealth MonitoringHuman MovementWearable Sensor
There is no established method for processing data from commercially available physical activity trackers. This study aims to develop a standardized approach to defining valid wear time for use in future interventions and analyses. Sixteen African American women (mean age = 62.1 years and mean body mass index = 35.5 kg/m2) wore the Fitbit Charge 2 for 20 days. Method 1 defined a valid day as ≥10-hr wear time with heart rate data. Method 2 removed minutes without heart rate data, minutes with heart rate ≤ mean - 2 SDs below mean and ≤2 steps, and nighttime. Linear regression modeled steps per day per week change. Using Method 1 (n = 292 person-days), participants had 20.5 (SD = 4.3) hr wear time per day compared with 16.3 (SD = 2.2) hr using Method 2 (n = 282) (p < .0001). With Method 1, participants took 7,436 (SD = 3,543) steps per day compared with 7,298 (SD = 3,501) steps per day with Method 2 (p = .64). The proposed algorithm represents a novel approach to standardizing data generated by physical activity trackers. Future studies are needed to improve the accuracy of physical activity data sets.
| Year | Citations | |
|---|---|---|
Page 1
Page 1