Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35830613›Full record

ArticleHaemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia2022

Comparison of free-living physical activity measurements between ActiGraph GT3X-BT and Fitbit Charge 3 in young people with haemophilia.

Ruth Elise D Matlary, Pål André Holme, Heidi Glosli, Corina Silvia Rueegg, May Grydeland

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ruth Elise D MatlaryDepartment of Haematology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Pål André HolmeDepartment of Haematology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Heidi GlosliCentre for Rare Disorders, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Corina Silvia RueeggOslo Centre for Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
May GrydelandDepartment of Physical Performance, Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Oslo, Norway.
Oslo University Hospital · NOUniversity of Oslo · NONorwegian School of Sport Sciences · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMeasurement of physical activity (PA) using commercial activity trackers such as Fitbit devices has become increasingly popular, also for people with haemophilia (PWH). The accuracy of the Fitbit model Charge 3 has not yet been examined.

aimsTo compare the Fitbit Charge 3 against the research-grade accelerometer ActiGraph GT3X-BT in measuring average daily steps and minutes spent in different PA intensities.

methodsTwenty-four young PWH wore a wrist-worn Fitbit Charge 3 and hip-worn ActiGraph GT3X-BT simultaneously for seven consecutive days in free-living conditions. Correlation of and differences between the devices for daily averages of PA parameters were assessed using Pearson's correlation coefficient and paired t-test, respectively. Agreement between devices was assessed using Bland-Altman plots.

resultsTwenty participants (mean age 21.8) were included in the analyses. We found moderate to high correlations between Fitbit and ActiGraph measured daily averages for all PA variables, but statistically significant differences between devices for all variables except daily minutes of moderate PA. Fitbit overestimated average daily steps, minutes of light, vigorous and moderate-to-vigorous PA. Bland-Altman plots showed a measurement bias between devices for all parameters with increasing overestimation by the Fitbit for higher volumes of PA.

conclusionThe Fitbit Charge 3 overestimated steps and minutes of light, moderate and moderate-to-vigorous PA as compared to the ActiGraph GT3X-BT, and this bias increased with PA volume. The Fitbit should therefore be used with caution in research, and we advise users of the device to be cognizant of this overestimation.

Indexed as

Fitness TrackersHemophilia AAccelerometryAdolescentAdultExerciseHumansReproducibility of ResultsYoung AdultActiGraphagreementcomparisonFitbithaemophiliaphysical activity

Identifiers

PMID35830613
PMCPMC9796296
OpenAlexW4285088581

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.