Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33019020›Full record

ArticleAnnual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference2020

Step Count Standardization: Validation of Step Counts from the Withings Activite using PiezoRxD and wGT3X-BT.

Wan-Tai M Au-Yeung, Jeffrey A Kaye, Zachary Beattie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

3 authors.

Wan-Tai M Au-Yeung
Jeffrey A Kaye
Zachary Beattie

Funding

Research Education ComponentP30AG066518 · NIA · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI Zachary Beattie · 2020 to 2026
$28.6M
Outreach, Recruitment and Education CoreP30AG008017 · NIA · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI KAYE, JEFFREY A · 1990 to 2019
$27.7M
Pilot CoreP30AG024978 · NIA · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI KAYE, JEFFREY A · 2004 to 2023
$9.0M
Resource CoreU2CAG054397 · NIA · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI KAYE, JEFFREY A · 2016 to 2019
$7.0M
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG008017NIA NIH HHS P30 AG024978NIA NIH HHS P30 AG066518NIA NIH HHS U2C AG054397
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Daily step counts from the Withings Activite were validated against those collected concurrently from the PiezoRxD Pedometer and the wGT3X-BT Actigraph worn on the waist and on the wrist in free-living conditions from 10 older adult volunteers. The Withings Activite underestimated step counts but showed good correlations with the other devices (Pearson correlation coefficient: 0.850 - 0.891).Clinical Relevance - Although the Withings Activite underestimated steps, they may be used in studies to estimate relative level of physical activity in free-living conditions since they have good correlations with other well-validated devices. Underestimation of steps may be corrected using linear transformation.

Indexed as

ActigraphyExerciseAgedBehavior TherapyHumansWristWrist Joint

Identifiers

PMID33019020
PMCPMC7759156

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.