ArticleJMIR human factors2023
Accuracy and Reliability of a Suite of Digital Measures of Walking Generated Using a Wrist-Worn Sensor in Healthy Individuals: Performance Characterization Study.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Wearable-sensor based walking and non-walking measures as progression markers in early to mid-stage Parkinson's disease.NPJ Parkinson's disease · 2026Article
- Resting Heart Rate and Associations With Clinical Measures From the Project Baseline Health Study: Observational Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Observational
- Increasing psychopharmacology clinical trial success rates with digital measures and biomarkers: Future methods.NPP - digital psychiatry and neuroscience · 2024Review
- Measuring Physical Functioning Using Wearable Sensors in Parkinson Disease and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (the Accuracy of Digital Assessment of Performance Trial Study): Protocol for a Prospective Observational Study.JMIR research protocols · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMobility is a meaningful aspect of an individual's health whose quantification can provide clinical insights. Wearable sensor technology can quantify walking behaviors (a key aspect of mobility) through continuous passive monitoring.
objectiveOur objective was to characterize the analytical performance (accuracy and reliability) of a suite of digital measures of walking behaviors as critical aspects in the practical implementation of digital measures into clinical studies.
methodsWe collected data from a wrist-worn device (the Verily Study Watch) worn for multiple days by a cohort of volunteer participants without a history of gait or walking impairment in a real-world setting. On the basis of step measurements computed in 10-second epochs from sensor data, we generated individual daily aggregates (participant-days) to derive a suite of measures of walking: step count, walking bout duration, number of total walking bouts, number of long walking bouts, number of short walking bouts, peak 30-minute walking cadence, and peak 30-minute walking pace. To characterize the accuracy of the measures, we examined agreement with truth labels generated by a concurrent, ankle-worn, reference device (Modus StepWatch 4) with known low error, calculating the following metrics: intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Pearson r coefficient, mean error, and mean absolute error. To characterize the reliability, we developed a novel approach to identify the time to reach a reliable readout (time to reliability) for each measure. This was accomplished by computing mean values over aggregation scopes ranging from 1 to 30 days and analyzing test-retest reliability based on ICCs between adjacent (nonoverlapping) time windows for each measure.
resultsIn the accuracy characterization, we collected data for a total of 162 participant-days from a testing cohort (n=35 participants; median observation time 5 days). Agreement with the reference device-based readouts in the testing subcohort (n=35) for the 8 measurements under evaluation, as reflected by ICCs, ranged between 0.7 and 0.9; Pearson r values were all greater than 0.75, and all reached statistical significance (P<.001). For the time-to-reliability characterization, we collected data for a total of 15,120 participant-days (overall cohort N=234; median observation time 119 days). All digital measures achieved an ICC between adjacent readouts of >0.75 by 16 days of wear time.
conclusionsWe characterized the accuracy and reliability of a suite of digital measures that provides comprehensive information about walking behaviors in real-world settings. These results, which report the level of agreement with high-accuracy reference labels and the time duration required to establish reliable measure readouts, can guide the practical implementation of these measures into clinical studies. Well-characterized tools to quantify walking behaviors in research contexts can provide valuable clinical information about general population cohorts and patients with specific 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.