ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2021
Validity of Wrist-Wearable Activity Devices for Estimating Physical Activity in Adolescents: Comparative Study.
Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Effectiveness of Wearable Devices as Physical Activity Interventions for Preventing and Treating Obesity in Children and Adolescents: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2022Pooled it
- Physical activity monitoring using wearable devices based on machine learning algorithms.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
- Protocol for a randomized controlled trial of a mobile app and wearable-based intervention promoted through physical education to enhance physical and psychological health in adolescents during out-of-school hours.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Incorporating Wearable Technology for Enhanced Rehabilitation Monitoring after Hip and Knee Replacement.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Comparison of Physical Activity Measured by Self-Reported Physical Activity and Wearable Device Xiaomi MI2 Band in Preadolescent School Children - A Pilot Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of exercise science · 2024Article
- Tracking of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) Longitudinally Using Biosensor and Patient-Reported Data: A Report on the Fully Decentralized Mobile Study to Measure and Predict Lupus Disease Activity Using Digital Signals-The OASIS Study.Biotech (Basel (Switzerland)) · 2023Article
- Microfluidic Wearable Devices for Sports Applications.Micromachines · 2023Review
- Validation of an accelerometer system for measuring physical activity and sedentary behavior in healthy children and adolescents.European journal of pediatrics · 2023Article
- Strategies to Improve Physical Activity and Nutrition Behaviours in Children and Adolescents: A Review.Nutrients · 2023Review
- Validity of the Xiaomi Mi Band 2, 3, 4 and 5 Wristbands for Assessing Physical Activity in 12-to-18-Year-Old Adolescents under Unstructured Free-Living Conditions. Fit-Person Study.Journal of sports science & medicine · 2023Article
- Agreement between Fitbit and ActiGraph Estimates of Physical Activity in Young Children.Measurement in physical education and exercise science · 2023Article
- Are Wrist-Worn Activity Trackers and Mobile Applications Valid for Assessing Physical Activity in High School Students? Wearfit Study.Journal of sports science & medicine · 2022Article
- Personalized Metabolic Avatar: A Data Driven Model of Metabolism for Weight Variation Forecasting and Diet Plan Evaluation.Nutrients · 2022Article
- Personalized Self-Monitoring of Energy Balance through Integration in a Web-Application of Dietary, Anthropometric, and Physical Activity Data.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Nutrition-Related Mobile Application for Daily Dietary Self-Monitoring.Journal of nutrition and metabolism · 2022Review
- Pre-sleep Protein Supplementation Affects Energy Metabolism and Appetite in Sedentary Healthy Adults.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
- Wristbands in Home-Based Rehabilitation-Validation of Heart Rate Measurement.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Promoting child and adolescent health through wearable technology: A systematic review.Digital healthReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe rapid advancements in science and technology of wrist-wearable activity devices offer considerable potential for clinical applications. Self-monitoring of physical activity (PA) with activity devices is helpful to improve the PA levels of adolescents. However, knowing the accuracy of activity devices in adolescents is necessary to identify current levels of PA and assess the effectiveness of intervention programs designed to increase PA.
objectiveThe study aimed to determine the validity of the 11 commercially available wrist-wearable activity devices for monitoring total steps and total 24-hour total energy expenditure (TEE) in healthy adolescents under simulated free-living conditions.
methodsNineteen (10 male and 9 female) participants aged 14 to 18 years performed a 24-hour activity cycle in a metabolic chamber. Each participant simultaneously wore 11 commercial wrist-wearable activity devices (Mi Band 2 [XiaoMi], B2 [Huawei], Bong 2s [Meizu], Amazfit [Huamei], Flex [Fitbit], UP3 [Jawbone], Shine 2 [Misfit], GOLiFE Care-X [GoYourLife], Pulse O2 [Withings], Vivofit [Garmin], and Loop [Polar Electro]) and one research-based triaxial accelerometer (GT3X+ [ActiGraph]). Criterion measures were total EE from the metabolic chamber (mcTEE) and total steps from the GT3X+ (AGsteps).
resultsPearson correlation coefficients r for 24-hour TEE ranged from .78 (Shine 2, Amazfit) to .96 (Loop) and for steps ranged from 0.20 (GOLiFE) to 0.57 (Vivofit). Mean absolute percent error (MAPE) for TEE ranged from 5.7% (Mi Band 2) to 26.4% (Amazfit) and for steps ranged from 14.2% (Bong 2s) to 27.6% (Loop). TEE estimates from the Mi Band 2, UP3, Vivofit, and Bong 2s were equivalent to mcTEE. Total steps from the Bong 2s were equivalent to AGsteps.
conclusionsOverall, the Bong 2s had the best accuracy for estimating TEE and total steps under simulated free-living conditions. Further research is needed to examine the validity of these devices in different types of physical activities under real-world conditions.
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.