ArticleFrontiers in sports and active living2024
Comparison of three device generations of the StepWatch Activity Monitor: analysis of model version agreement in pediatric and adult independent ambulators.
Article in Frontiers in sports and active living, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lower Daily Walking Volume and Less Walking at Intermediate and Higher Cadences in Older Women with Clinician-Diagnosed Major Depressive Disorder: An Exploratory Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Activity Detection of Paralympic Athletes with Lower Limb Running-Specific Prosthesis During Extended Periods of Time: Software Development and Preliminary Validation.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Devices such as the StepWatch Activity Monitor (SAM) have been available for 20 years and have been shown to accurately measure ambulatory activity. This study aimed to evaluate the agreement among the three generations of the StepWatch Activity Monitor (SW3, SW4, and SW5) with respect to stride count. Methods: A total of 36 participants (age range, 6-55 years) participated in this institutional review board-approved study. The participants concurrently wore three different SAM model devices on the same leg and performed a 6-min walk test (6MWT). A research staff member of the laboratory manually counted the number of strides for the first 2 min of the test (2MWT). Agreement among the device models was evaluated by calculating ANOVAs and interclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and creating Bland-Altman plots. Results: There was no significant difference among the model versions during the 6MWT and 2MWT ( Conclusions: The results from the present study demonstrate that the stride counts among all three devices are comparable and relative to the manual stride count. All three SAM model versions had an ICC of >0.90. Researchers can safely incorporate historical data from previous SAM model versions with newer data collected with the latest SAM model version.
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.