ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2021
Wrist-Worn Activity Trackers in Laboratory and Free-Living Settings for Patients With Chronic Pain: Criterion Validity 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. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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.
eVISualisation of Physical Activity and Pain (eVIS) for Patients With Chronic Pain Participating in Swedish Interdisciplinary Pain Rehabilitation Programs: a Registry-based Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
The Future of Pain Management: Can Person-centred and Precision AI-Based Decision Support Enhance Interdisciplinary Rehabilitation for Chronic Pain?
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Quality Evaluation of Free-living Validation Studies for the Assessment of 24-Hour Physical Behavior in Adults via Wearables: Systematic Review.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2022Pooled it
- Accuracy and Precision of Energy Expenditure, Heart Rate, and Steps Measured by Combined-Sensing Fitbits Against Reference Measures: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2022Pooled it
- The relationships between step count and all-cause mortality and cardiovascular events: A dose-response meta-analysis.Journal of sport and health science · 2021Pooled it
- The Representation of Different Populations in Studies Assessing the Validity of Consumer Wearable Photoplethysmography-Based Measurements: Scoping Review.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Wrist-Worn Photoplethysmography Trackers with an Electrocardiogram in Patients with Ischemic Heart Disease: A Validation Study.Cardiovascular engineering and technology · 2024Article
- Accuracy of consumer-based activity trackers to measure and coach patients with lower limb lymphoedema.PloS one · 2024Article
- Evidence of spontaneous cardiac-locomotor coupling during daily activities in healthy adults.Frontiers in physiology · 2024Article
- The use of commercial wrist-worn technology to track physiological outcomes in behavioral interventions.Current opinion in clinical nutrition and metabolic care · 2023Review
- Accuracy and Reliability of a Suite of Digital Measures of Walking Generated Using a Wrist-Worn Sensor in Healthy Individuals: Performance Characterization Study.JMIR human factors · 2023Article
- Article
- Let's Play at Digging : How Vigorous Is This Energetic Task for a Young Forager?Human nature (Hawthorne, N.Y.) · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPhysical activity is evidently a crucial part of the rehabilitation process for patients with chronic pain. Modern wrist-worn activity tracking devices seemingly have a great potential to provide objective feedback and assist in the adoption of healthy physical activity behavior by supplying data of energy expenditure expressed as metabolic equivalent of task units (MET). However, no studies of any wrist-worn activity tracking devices' have examined criterion validity in estimating energy expenditure, heart rate, or step count in patients with chronic pain.
objectiveThe aim was to determine the criterion validity of wrist-worn activity tracking devices for estimations of energy expenditure, heart rate, and step count in a controlled laboratory setting and free-living settings for patients with chronic pain.
methodsIn this combined laboratory and field validation study, energy expenditure, heart rate, and step count were simultaneously estimated by a wrist-worn activity tracker (Fitbit Versa), indirect calorimetry (Jaeger Oxycon Pro), and a research-grade hip-worn accelerometer (ActiGraph GT3X) during treadmill walking at 3 speeds (3.0 km/h, 4.5 km/h, and 6.0 km/h) in the laboratory setting. Energy expenditure and step count were also estimated by the wrist-worn activity tracker in free-living settings for 72 hours. The criterion validity of each measure was determined using intraclass and Spearman correlation, Bland-Altman plots, and mean absolute percentage error. An analysis of variance was used to determine whether there were any significant systematic differences between estimations.
resultsA total of 42 patients (age: 25-66 years; male: 10/42, 24%; female: 32/42, 76%), living with chronic pain (duration, in years: mean 9, SD 6.72) were included. At baseline, their mean pain intensity was 3.5 (SD 1.1) out of 6 (Multidimensional Pain Inventory, Swedish version). Results showed that the wrist-worn activity tracking device (Fitbit Versa) systematically overestimated energy expenditure when compared to the criterion standard (Jaeger Oxycon Pro) and the relative criterion standard (ActiGraph GT3X). Poor agreement and poor correlation were shown between Fitbit Versa and both Jaeger Oxycon Pro and ActiGraph GT3X for estimated energy expenditure at all treadmill speeds. Estimations of heart rate demonstrated poor to fair agreement during laboratory-based treadmill walks. For step count, the wrist-worn devices showed fair agreement and fair correlation at most treadmill speeds. In free-living settings; however, the agreement for step count between the wrist-worn device and waist-worn accelerometer was good, and the correlation was excellent.
conclusionsThe wrist-worn device systematically overestimated energy expenditure and showed poor agreement and correlation compared to the criterion standard (Jaeger Oxycon Pro) and the relative criterion standard (ActiGraph GT3X), which needs to be considered when used clinically. Step count measured with a wrist-worn device, however, seemed to be a valid estimation, suggesting that future guidelines could include such variables in this group with chronic pain.
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.