Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33361276›Full record

GuidelineBritish journal of sports medicine2021

Recommendations for determining the validity of consumer wearable and smartphone step count: expert statement and checklist of the INTERLIVE network.

William Johnston, Pedro B Judice, Pablo Molina García, Jan M Mühlen, Esben Lykke Skovgaard, Julie Stang, Moritz Schumann, Shulin Cheng, Wilhelm Bloch, Jan Christian Brønd and 5 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readGuidelineSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Guideline in British journal of sports medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06600438 (Slow-SPEED-United Kingdom), which is not on this map. Cited by 55 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 9 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.

NCT06600438 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Slow-SPEED-United Kingdom: A Double-Blind Randomised Feasibility Trial of a Remote Gamified Physical Activity Programme in Adults With Hyposmia.

TypeinterventionalSponsorQueen Mary University of LondonRan2026 to 2027Enrolled110ConditionsHyposmia, Olfactory Dysfunction, AnosmiaArmsSlow-SPEED app
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

55 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

15 authors.

William Johnston *Insight Centre for Data Analytics, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0525-6577
Pedro B Judice *Centro de Investigação em Desporto, Educação Física e Exercício e Saúde, CIDEFES, Universidade Lusófona, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2791-258X
Pablo Molina García *PROFITH (PROmoting FITness and Health through physical activity) Research Group, Department of Physical Education and Sports, Faculty of Sport Sciences, Sport and Health University Research Institute (iMUDS), University of Granada, Granada, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6888-0997
Jan M MühlenInstitute of Cardiovascular Research and Sports Medicine, Department of Molecular and Cellular Sports Medicine, German Sport University, Cologne, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9983-6403
Esben Lykke SkovgaardDepartment of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, Research Unit for Exercise Epidemiology, Centre of Research in Childhood Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense M, Denmark.
Julie StangDepartment of Sport Medicine, Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Oslo, Norway.
Moritz SchumannInstitute of Cardiovascular Research and Sports Medicine, Department of Molecular and Cellular Sports Medicine, German Sport University, Cologne, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9605-3489
Shulin ChengInstitute of Cardiovascular Research and Sports Medicine, Department of Molecular and Cellular Sports Medicine, German Sport University, Cologne, Germany.
Wilhelm BlochInstitute of Cardiovascular Research and Sports Medicine, Department of Molecular and Cellular Sports Medicine, German Sport University, Cologne, Germany.
Jan Christian BrøndDepartment of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, Research Unit for Exercise Epidemiology, Centre of Research in Childhood Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense M, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6718-3022
Ulf EkelundDepartment of Sport Medicine, Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Oslo, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2115-9267
Anders GrøntvedDepartment of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, Research Unit for Exercise Epidemiology, Centre of Research in Childhood Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense M, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1584-679X
Brian CaulfieldInsight Centre for Data Analytics, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Francisco B OrtegaPROFITH (PROmoting FITness and Health through physical activity) Research Group, Department of Physical Education and Sports, Faculty of Sport Sciences, Sport and Health University Research Institute (iMUDS), University of Granada, Granada, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2001-1121
Luis B SardinhaExercise and Health Laboratory, CIPER, Faculdade de Motricidade Humana, Universidade de Lisboa, Cruz-Quebrada, Portugal lsardinha@fmh.ulisboa.pt.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6230-6027

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Consumer wearable and smartphone devices provide an accessible means to objectively measure physical activity (PA) through step counts. With the increasing proliferation of this technology, consumers, practitioners and researchers are interested in leveraging these devices as a means to track and facilitate PA behavioural change. However, while the acceptance of these devices is increasing, the validity of many consumer devices have not been rigorously and transparently evaluated. The Towards Intelligent Health and Well-Being Network of Physical Activity Assessment (INTERLIVE) is a joint European initiative of six universities and one industrial partner. The consortium was founded in 2019 and strives to develop best-practice recommendations for evaluating the validity of consumer wearables and smartphones. This expert statement presents a best-practice consumer wearable and smartphone step counter validation protocol. A two-step process was used to aggregate data and form a scientific foundation for the development of an optimal and feasible validation protocol: (1) a systematic literature review and (2) additional searches of the wider literature pertaining to factors that may introduce bias during the validation of these devices. The systematic literature review process identified 2897 potential articles, with 85 articles deemed eligible for the final dataset. From the synthesised data, we identified a set of six key domains to be considered during design and reporting of validation studies: target population, criterion measure, index measure, validation conditions, data processing and statistical analysis. Based on these six domains, a set of key variables of interest were identified and a 'basic' and 'advanced' multistage protocol for the validation of consumer wearable and smartphone step counters was developed. The INTERLIVE consortium recommends that the proposed protocol is used when considering the validation of any consumer wearable or smartphone step counter. Checklists have been provided to guide validation protocol development and reporting. The network also provide guidance for future research activities, highlighting the imminent need for the development of feasible alternative 'gold-standard' criterion measures for free-living validation. Adherence to these validation and reporting standards will help ensure methodological and reporting consistency, facilitating comparison between consumer devices. Ultimately, this will ensure that as these devices are integrated into standard medical care, consumers, practitioners, industry and researchers can use this technology safely and to its full potential.

Indexed as

ChecklistConsensusAdolescentAdultBiomedical TechnologyChildEuropeExerciseFitness TrackersHumansMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsSmartphoneUniversitiesYoung Adultaccelerometerconsensus statementphysical activityvaliditywalking

Identifiers

PMID33361276
PMCPMC8273687

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.