ArticleMedicine and science in sports and exercise2019
Validity of Cardiorespiratory Fitness Measured with Fitbit Compared to V˙O2max.
Article in Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Validity of Estimating the Maximal Oxygen Consumption by Consumer Wearables: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis and Expert Statement of the INTERLIVE Network.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022Pooled it
- Accuracy of VOMayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2026Article
- Using an Adult-Designed Wearable for Pediatric Monitoring: Practical Tutorial and Application in School-Aged Children With Obesity.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Validity of V̇OEuropean journal of applied physiology · 2026Article
- Machine Learning-Based VOBiosensors · 2025Article
- Clusters of multidimensional exercise response patterns and estimated heart failure risk in the Framingham Heart Study.ESC heart failure · 2024Article
- Assessing the Accuracy of Smartwatch-Based Estimation of Maximum Oxygen Uptake Using the Apple Watch Series 7: Validation Study.JMIR biomedical engineering · 2024Article
- Use of Wearable Devices for Peak Oxygen Consumption Measurement in Clinical Cardiology: Case Report and Literature Review.Interactive journal of medical research · 2023Article
- Data Quality Degradation on Prediction Models Generated From Continuous Activity and Heart Rate Monitoring: Exploratory Analysis Using Simulation.JMIR cardio · 2023Article
- Physical Activity Is Associated With Macular Thickness: A Multi-Cohort Observational Study.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2023Observational
- Exercise therapy as a digital therapeutic for chronic disease management: consideration for clinical product development.Frontiers in digital health · 2023Review
- Assessment of Peak Oxygen Uptake with a Smartwatch and its Usefulness for Training of Runners.International journal of sports medicine · 2022Article
- Systematic Review of Fitbit Charge 2 Validation Studies for Exercise Tracking.Translational journal of the American College of Sports Medicine · 2022Article
- Smartphone-recorded physical activity for estimating cardiorespiratory fitness.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Sensing leg movement enhances wearable monitoring of energy expenditure.Nature communications · 2021Article
- Smartphone-Based VO2max Measurement With Heart Snapshot in Clinical and Real-world Settings With a Diverse Population: Validation Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2021Article
- Using Accelerometry for Evaluating Energy Consumption and Running Intensity Distribution Throughout a Marathon According to Sex.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Workers' physical activity data contribute to estimating maximal oxygen consumption: a questionnaire study to concurrently assess workers' sedentary behavior and cardiorespiratory fitness.BMC public health · 2020Article
- Performance of a commercial multi-sensor wearable (Fitbit Charge HR) in measuring physical activity and sleep in healthy children.PloS one · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeCardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), broadly defined as the body's ability to utilize oxygen, is a well-established prognostic marker of health, but it is not routinely measured. This may be due to the difficulty of acquiring high-quality CRF measures. The purpose of this study was to independently determine the validity of the Fitbit Charge 2's measure of CRF (Fitbit CRF).
methodsSixty-five healthy adults between the ages of 18 and 45 yr (55% female, 45% male) were recruited to undergo gold standard V˙O2max testing and wear a Fitbit Charge 2 continuously for 1 wk during which they were instructed to complete a qualifying outdoor run to derive the Fitbit CRF (units: mL·kg·min). This measure was compared with V˙O2max measures (units: mL·kg·min) epoched at 15 and 60 s.
resultsBland-Altman analyses revealed that Fitbit CRF had a positive bias of 1.59 mL·kg·min compared with laboratory data epoched at 15 s and 0.30 mL·kg·min compared with data epoched at 60 s (n = 60). F statistics (2.09; 0.08) and P values (0.133; 0.926) from Bradley-Blackwood tests for the concordance of Fitbit CRF with 15- and 60-s laboratory data, respectively, support the null hypothesis of equal means and variances, indicating there is concordance between the two measures. Mean absolute percentage error was less than 10% for each comparison.
conclusionsThe Fitbit Charge 2 provides an acceptable level of validity when measuring CRF in young, healthy, and fit adults who are able to run. Further research is required to determine if it is a potentially useful tool in clinical practice and epidemiological research to quantify, categorize, and longitudinally track risk for adverse outcomes.
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.