Observational studyJournal of medical Internet research2024
Analysis of Physical Activity Using Wearable Health Technology in US Adults Enrolled in the All of Us Research Program: Multiyear Observational Study.
Observational study in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. 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.
- Criterion Validity of a Consumer Wearable for Step Counting and Activity Intensity Classification in Adults With Lung Cancer: Laboratory-Based Validation Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Optimizing Goal Difficulty in a Digital Weight Loss Intervention: The Ignite Pilot Randomized Trial.Obesity science & practice · 2026Article
- Fitbit Physical Activity and Sleep Data in the All of Us Research Program: Data Exploration and Processing Considerations for Research.Medicine and science in sports and exercise · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo date, no studies have examined adherence to the 2018 Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans (PAGA) in real-world longitudinal settings using objectively measured activity monitoring data. This study addresses this gap by using commercial activity monitoring (Fitbit) data from the All of Us dataset.
objectiveThe primary objectives were to describe the prevalence of adherence to the 2018 PAGA and identify associated sociodemographic determinants. Additionally, we compared 3 distinct methods of processing physical activity (PA) data to estimate adherence to the 2008 PAGA.
methodsWe used the National Institutes of Health's All of Us dataset, which contains minute-level Fitbit data for 13,947 US adults over a 7-year time span (2015-2022), to estimate adherence to PAGA. A published step-based method was used to estimate metabolic equivalents and assess adherence to the 2018 PAGA (ie, ≥150 minutes of moderate- to vigorous-intensity PA per week). We compared the step-based method, the heart rate-based method, and the proprietary Fitbit-developed algorithm to estimate adherence to the 2008 PAGA.
resultsThe average overall adherence to the 2018 PAGA was 21.6% (3006/13,947; SE 0.4%). Factors associated with lower adherence in multivariate logistic regression analysis included female sex (relative to male sex; adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.66, 95% CI 0.60-0.72; P<.001); BMI of 25.0-29.9 kg/m
conclusionsOur results show significant sociodemographic differences in PAGA adherence and notably different estimates of adherence depending on the algorithm used. These findings warrant the need to account for these disparities when implementing PA interventions and the need to establish an accurate and reliable method of using commercial accelerometers to examine PA, particularly as health care systems begin integrating wearable device data into patient health records.
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.