Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31911823›Full record

ArticleEuropean review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity2020

Criterion validity for step counting in four consumer-grade physical activity monitors among older adults with and without rollators.

Rasmus Tolstrup Larsen, Christoffer Brun Korfitsen, Carsten Bogh Juhl, Henning Boje Andersen, Henning Langberg, Jan Christensen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The MIPAM trial - motivational interviewing and physical activity monitoring to enhance the daily level of physical activity among older adults - a randomized controlled trial.European review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Rasmus Tolstrup Larsen1Department of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, CopenRehab, Section of Social Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Gothersgade 160, 3rd floor, 1123 Copenhagen K, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-8860-4233
Christoffer Brun Korfitsen1Department of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, CopenRehab, Section of Social Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Gothersgade 160, 3rd floor, 1123 Copenhagen K, Denmark.
Carsten Bogh Juhl2Research Unit of Musculoskeletal Function and Physiotherapy, Institute of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Henning Boje Andersen4Technical University of Denmark, DTU Management Engineering Inst, Diplomvej 372, 2800 Lyngby, Denmark.
Henning Langberg1Department of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, CopenRehab, Section of Social Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Gothersgade 160, 3rd floor, 1123 Copenhagen K, Denmark.
Jan Christensen5Department of Occupational- and Physiotherapy, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
University of Copenhagen · DKUniversity of Southern Denmark · DKTechnical University of Denmark · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFew studies have investigated the measurement properties of consumer-grade physical activity monitors (PAMs) in older adults. Therefore, we investigated the criterion validity of consumer-grade PAMs in older adults and whether the measurement properties differed between older adults with and without rollators and whether worn on the hip or at the wrist.

methodsConsumer-grade PAMs were eligible for inclusion in this study if they: 1) could be fastened at the hip as well as on the wrist, 2) were simple in function and design and thus easy to use for participants with minimal technical skills, 3) included step-counting as outcome measure and 4) were powered by a button cell battery. Participants performed self-paced walking for six minutes while two physiotherapists counted their steps with a click-counter. The average of the two counts was used as criterion. The participants wore 16 monitors, four located bilaterally on both hips and wrists. Our prior expectation was that all monitors would have at least moderate criterion validity for all participants, good criterion validity for participants walking without a rollator and poor criterion validity for participants walking with a rollator.

resultsFour physical activity monitors were included in this study; Misfit Shine, Nokia GO, Jawbone UP Move and Garmin Vivofit 3. A total of 103 older adults participated.Nokia GO was excluded from this study due to technical issues. Therefore, we present results on the frequency of data loss, ICC (1, 2) and percentage measurement error for Misfit Shine, Garmin Vivofit 3 and Jawbone UP Move located on four different positions.

conclusionsThe hip-worn PAMs did not differ significantly in terms of measurement error or criterion validity. Wrist-worn monitors cannot adequately measure number of steps in a population of older adults using rollators. The hip-worn PAMs were superior to wrist-worn PAMs among older adults with and without rollators.

Indexed as

Physical activity monitorsTechnologyValidityWalking

Identifiers

PMID31911823
PMCPMC6942313
OpenAlexW3008070970

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.