ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2023
Accuracy of consumer-based activity trackers as measuring tool and coaching device in breast and colorectal cancer survivors.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validity of a Consumer-Based Wearable to Measure Clinical Parameters in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Healthy Controls: Observational Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2024Observational
- Accuracy of consumer-based activity trackers to measure and coach patients with lower limb lymphoedema.PloS one · 2024Article
- Agreement between Fitbit Versa 4 and a reference standard on time-domain nocturnal heart rate variability: A pilot study.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeConsumer-based activity trackers are used to measure and promote PA. We studied the accuracy of a wrist- and waist-worn activity tracker in cancer survivors and compared these results to a healthy age-matched control group.
methodsTwenty-two cancer survivors and 35 healthy subjects wore an activity tracker at the waist and at the wrist combined with a reference activity monitor at the waist (Dynaport Movemonitor). The devices were worn for 14 consecutive days. The mean daily step count from both activity trackers was compared with the reference activity monitor to investigate accuracy and agreement (paired t-test, intraclass correlation, Bland-Altman plots). To evaluate the accuracy as a coaching tool, day-by-day differences within patients were calculated. The Kendall correlation coefficient was used to test the consistency of ranking daily steps between the activity trackers and the reference activity monitor.
resultsThe wrist-worn wearable significantly overestimated the daily step count in the cancer group (mean ± SDΔ: + 1305 (2685) steps per day; p = 0.033) and in the healthy control group (mean ± SDΔ: + 1598 (2927) steps per day; p = 0.003). The waist-worn wearable underestimated the step count in both groups, although this was not statistically significant. As a coaching device, moderate (r = 0.642-0.670) and strong (r = 0.733-0.738) accuracy was found for the wrist- and waist-worn tracker, respectively, for detecting day-by-day variability in both populations.
conclusionOur results show that wrist-worn activity trackers significantly overestimate daily step count in both cancer survivors and healthy control subjects. Based on the accuracy, in particular, the waist-worn activity tracker could possibly be used as a coaching tool.
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.