Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2016
Estimating Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior in a Free-Living Context: A Pragmatic Comparison of Consumer-Based Activity Trackers and ActiGraph Accelerometry.
Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
53 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 103 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Use of Wearable Devices in Oncology Patients: A Systematic Review.The oncologist · 2024Pooled it
- Quality Evaluation of Free-living Validation Studies for the Assessment of 24-Hour Physical Behavior in Adults via Wearables: Systematic Review.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2022Pooled it
- Validity and Reliability of International Physical Activity Questionnaires for Adults across EU Countries: Systematic Review and Meta Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Pooled it
- Reliability and Validity of Commercially Available Wearable Devices for Measuring Steps, Energy Expenditure, and Heart Rate: Systematic Review.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2020Pooled it
- Current State of Digital Biomarker Technologies for Real-Life, Home-Based Monitoring of Cognitive Function for Mild Cognitive Impairment to Mild Alzheimer Disease and Implications for Clinical Care: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Pooled it
- A pilot randomized controlled trial of a virtual peer-support exercise intervention for female older adults with cancer.BMC geriatrics · 2024Trial
- A Smart Shoe Insole to Monitor Frail Older Adults' Walking Speed: Results of Two Evaluation Phases Completed in a Living Lab and Through a 12-Week Pilot Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2021Trial
- Effects of intradialytic cycling exercise on daily physical activity, physical fitness, body composition, and clinical parameters in high-volume online hemodiafiltration patients: a pilot randomized-controlled trial.International urology and nephrology · 2021Trial
- Impact of postoperative instructions on physical activity following pelvic reconstructive surgery: a randomized controlled trial.International urogynecology journal · 2020Trial
- Assessment of Wrist-Worn Activity Tracker Accuracy for Measuring Sedentary Behavior in Outpatients With Cardiovascular Disease: Validation Study.JMIR cardio · 2026Article
- Article
- Validity of self-assessment tools for cardiovascular risk behaviors: A systematic review.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2025Review
- Frailty and Physical Activity: A Compositional Isotemporal Substitution Analysis from the All of Us Research Program.Journal of frailty, sarcopenia and falls · 2025Article
- Aggregation Periods Influence Step Count Error in Low-Power Wearables.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Addressing the Chronic Pain-Early Cognitive Decline Comorbidity Among Older Adults: Protocol for the Active Brains Remote Efficacy Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- TRACK & ACT: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial exploring the comparative effectiveness of pedometers and activity trackers for changing physical activity and sedentary behaviour in inactive individuals.Journal of activity, sedentary and sleep behaviors · 2023Article
- Examining physical activity and quality of life in adults with autism spectrum disorder and intellectual disability.Journal of intellectual disabilities : JOID · 2022Article
- Comparison of free-living physical activity measurements between ActiGraph GT3X-BT and Fitbit Charge 3 in young people with haemophilia.Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia · 2022Article
- Day-level associations of physical activity and sedentary time in mother-child dyads across three years: a multi-wave longitudinal study using accelerometers.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2022Article
- Comparison of Wrist- and Hip-Worn Activity Monitors When Meeting Step Guidelines.Preventing chronic disease · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundActivity trackers are increasingly popular with both consumers and researchers for monitoring activity and for promoting positive behavior change. However, there is a lack of research investigating the performance of these devices in free-living contexts, for which findings are likely to vary from studies conducted in well-controlled laboratory settings.
objectiveThe aim was to compare Fitbit One and Jawbone UP estimates of steps, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), and sedentary behavior with data from the ActiGraph GT3X+ accelerometer in a free-living context.
methodsThirty-two participants were recruited using convenience sampling; 29 provided valid data for this study (female: 90%, 26/29; age: mean 39.6, SD 11.0 years). On two occasions for 7 days each, participants wore an ActiGraph GT3X+ accelerometer on their right hip and either a hip-worn Fitbit One (n=14) or wrist-worn Jawbone UP (n=15) activity tracker. Daily estimates of steps and very active minutes were derived from the Fitbit One (n=135 days) and steps, active time, and longest idle time from the Jawbone UP (n=154 days). Daily estimates of steps, MVPA, and longest sedentary bout were derived from the corresponding days of ActiGraph data. Correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman plots with examination of systematic bias were used to assess convergent validity and agreement between the devices and the ActiGraph. Cohen's kappa was used to assess the agreement between each device and the ActiGraph for classification of active versus inactive (≥10,000 steps per day and ≥30 min/day of MVPA) comparable with public health guidelines.
resultsCorrelations with ActiGraph estimates of steps and MVPA ranged between .72 and .90 for Fitbit One and .56 and .75 for Jawbone UP. Compared with ActiGraph estimates, both devices overestimated daily steps by 8% (Fitbit One) and 14% (Jawbone UP). However, mean differences were larger for daily MVPA (Fitbit One: underestimated by 46%; Jawbone UP: overestimated by 50%). There was systematic bias across all outcomes for both devices. Correlations with ActiGraph data for longest idle time (Jawbone UP) ranged from .08 to .19. Agreement for classifying days as active or inactive using the ≥10,000 steps/day criterion was substantial (Fitbit One: κ=.68; Jawbone UP: κ=.52) and slight-fair using the criterion of ≥30 min/day of MVPA (Fitbit One: κ=.40; Jawbone UP: κ=.14).
conclusionsThere was moderate-strong agreement between the ActiGraph and both Fitbit One and Jawbone UP for the estimation of daily steps. However, due to modest accuracy and systematic bias, they are better suited for consumer-based self-monitoring (eg, for the public consumer or in behavior change interventions) rather than to evaluate research outcomes. The outcomes that relate to health-enhancing MVPA (eg, "very active minutes" for Fitbit One or "active time" for Jawbone UP) and sedentary behavior ("idle time" for Jawbone UP) should be used with caution by consumers and researchers alike.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.