Back to Search Start Over

Comparison of raw accelerometry data from ActiGraph, Apple Watch, Garmin, and Fitbit using a mechanical shaker table.

Authors :
White JW 3rd
Finnegan OL
Tindall N
Nelakuditi S
Brown DE 3rd
Pate RR
Welk GJ
de Zambotti M
Ghosal R
Wang Y
Burkart S
Adams EL
Chandrashekhar M
Armstrong B
Beets MW
Weaver RG
Source :
PloS one [PLoS One] 2024 Mar 29; Vol. 19 (3), pp. e0286898. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Mar 29 (Print Publication: 2024).
Publication Year :
2024

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability and validity of the raw accelerometry output from research-grade and consumer wearable devices compared to accelerations produced by a mechanical shaker table. Raw accelerometry data from a total of 40 devices (i.e., n = 10 ActiGraph wGT3X-BT, n = 10 Apple Watch Series 7, n = 10 Garmin Vivoactive 4S, and n = 10 Fitbit Sense) were compared to reference accelerations produced by an orbital shaker table at speeds ranging from 0.6 Hz (4.4 milligravity-mg) to 3.2 Hz (124.7mg). Two-way random effects absolute intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) tested inter-device reliability. Pearson product moment, Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), absolute error, mean bias, and equivalence testing were calculated to assess the validity between the raw estimates from the devices and the reference metric. Estimates from Apple, ActiGraph, Garmin, and Fitbit were reliable, with ICCs = 0.99, 0.97, 0.88, and 0.88, respectively. Estimates from ActiGraph, Apple, and Fitbit devices exhibited excellent concordance with the reference CCCs = 0.88, 0.83, and 0.85, respectively, while estimates from Garmin exhibited moderate concordance CCC = 0.59 based on the mean aggregation method. ActiGraph, Apple, and Fitbit produced similar absolute errors = 16.9mg, 21.6mg, and 22.0mg, respectively, while Garmin produced higher absolute error = 32.5mg compared to the reference. ActiGraph produced the lowest mean bias 0.0mg (95%CI = -40.0, 41.0). Equivalence testing revealed raw accelerometry data from all devices were not statistically significantly within the equivalence bounds of the shaker speed. Findings from this study provide evidence that raw accelerometry data from Apple, Garmin, and Fitbit devices can be used to reliably estimate movement; however, no estimates were statistically significantly equivalent to the reference. Future studies could explore device-agnostic and harmonization methods for estimating physical activity using the raw accelerometry signals from the consumer wearables studied herein.<br />Competing Interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: Unrelated to this work Dr. Weaver and Dr. Armstrong report board membership and ownership shares in Trackster LLC. Unrelated to this work Dr. de Zambotti reports grants from Noctrix Health and Verily Life Science LLC (Alphabet Inc.), and is a co-founder and Chief Scientific Officer at Lisa Health Inc. and has ownership of shares in Lisa Health.<br /> (Copyright: © 2024 White et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1932-6203
Volume :
19
Issue :
3
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
PloS one
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
38551940
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286898