Concurrent validity of the Fitbit for assessing sedentary behavior and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity

Abstract Background Recent advances in sensor technologies have promoted the use of consumer-based accelerometers such as Fitbit Flex in epidemiological and clinical research; however, the validity of the Fitbit Flex in measuring sedentary behavior (SED) and physical activity (PA) has not been fully...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Nicklaus Redenius, Youngwon Kim, Wonwoo Byun
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2019-02-01
Series:BMC Medical Research Methodology
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12874-019-0668-1
id doaj-f00fe08a844140689f55ab5e1b4b1702
record_format Article
spelling doaj-f00fe08a844140689f55ab5e1b4b17022020-11-25T00:34:37ZengBMCBMC Medical Research Methodology1471-22882019-02-011911910.1186/s12874-019-0668-1Concurrent validity of the Fitbit for assessing sedentary behavior and moderate-to-vigorous physical activityNicklaus Redenius0Youngwon Kim1Wonwoo Byun2Department of Health, Nutrition, and Exercise Sciences, North Dakota State UniversityDivision of Kinesiology, School of Public Health, The University of Hong Kong Li Ka Shing Faculty of MedicineDepartment of Health, Kinesiology, and Recreation, University of UtahAbstract Background Recent advances in sensor technologies have promoted the use of consumer-based accelerometers such as Fitbit Flex in epidemiological and clinical research; however, the validity of the Fitbit Flex in measuring sedentary behavior (SED) and physical activity (PA) has not been fully determined against previously validated research-grade accelerometers such as ActiGraph GT3X+. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the concurrent validity of the Fitbit Flex against ActiGraph GT3X+ in a free-living condition. Methods A total of 65 participants (age: M = 42, SD = 14 years, female: 72%) each wore a Fitbit Flex and GT3X+ for seven consecutive days. After excluding sleep and non-wear time, time spent (min/day) in SED and moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) were estimated using various cut-points for GT3X+ and brand-specific algorithms for Fitbit, respectively. Repeated measures one-way ANOVA and mean absolute percent errors (MAPE) served to examine differences and measurement errors in SED and MVPA estimates between Fitbit Flex and GT3X+, respectively. Pearson and Spearman correlations and Bland-Altman (BA) plots were used to evaluate the association and potential systematic bias between Fitbit Flex and GT3X+. PROC MIXED procedure in SAS was used to examine the equivalence (i.e., the 90% confidence interval with ±10% equivalence zone) between the devices. Results Fitbit Flex produced similar SED and low MAPE (mean difference [MD] = 37 min/day, P = .21, MAPE = 6.8%), but significantly higher MVPA and relatively large MAPE (MD = 59–77 min/day, P < .0001, MAPE = 56.6–74.3%) compared with the estimates from GT3X+ using three different cut-points. The correlations between Fitbit Flex and GT3X+ were consistently higher for SED (r = 0.90, ρ = 0.86, P < .01), but weaker for MVPA (r = 0.65–0.76, ρ = 0.69–0.79, P < .01). BA plots revealed that there is no apparent bias in estimating SED. Conclusion In comparison with the GT3X+ accelerometer, the Fitbit Flex provided comparatively accurate estimates of SED, but the Fitbit Flex overestimated MVPA under free-living conditions. Future investigations using the Fitbit Flex should be aware of present findings.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12874-019-0668-1Physical activitySedentary behaviorValidityAccelerometerPublic health
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Nicklaus Redenius
Youngwon Kim
Wonwoo Byun
spellingShingle Nicklaus Redenius
Youngwon Kim
Wonwoo Byun
Concurrent validity of the Fitbit for assessing sedentary behavior and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity
BMC Medical Research Methodology
Physical activity
Sedentary behavior
Validity
Accelerometer
Public health
author_facet Nicklaus Redenius
Youngwon Kim
Wonwoo Byun
author_sort Nicklaus Redenius
title Concurrent validity of the Fitbit for assessing sedentary behavior and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity
title_short Concurrent validity of the Fitbit for assessing sedentary behavior and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity
title_full Concurrent validity of the Fitbit for assessing sedentary behavior and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity
title_fullStr Concurrent validity of the Fitbit for assessing sedentary behavior and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity
title_full_unstemmed Concurrent validity of the Fitbit for assessing sedentary behavior and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity
title_sort concurrent validity of the fitbit for assessing sedentary behavior and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity
publisher BMC
series BMC Medical Research Methodology
issn 1471-2288
publishDate 2019-02-01
description Abstract Background Recent advances in sensor technologies have promoted the use of consumer-based accelerometers such as Fitbit Flex in epidemiological and clinical research; however, the validity of the Fitbit Flex in measuring sedentary behavior (SED) and physical activity (PA) has not been fully determined against previously validated research-grade accelerometers such as ActiGraph GT3X+. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the concurrent validity of the Fitbit Flex against ActiGraph GT3X+ in a free-living condition. Methods A total of 65 participants (age: M = 42, SD = 14 years, female: 72%) each wore a Fitbit Flex and GT3X+ for seven consecutive days. After excluding sleep and non-wear time, time spent (min/day) in SED and moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) were estimated using various cut-points for GT3X+ and brand-specific algorithms for Fitbit, respectively. Repeated measures one-way ANOVA and mean absolute percent errors (MAPE) served to examine differences and measurement errors in SED and MVPA estimates between Fitbit Flex and GT3X+, respectively. Pearson and Spearman correlations and Bland-Altman (BA) plots were used to evaluate the association and potential systematic bias between Fitbit Flex and GT3X+. PROC MIXED procedure in SAS was used to examine the equivalence (i.e., the 90% confidence interval with ±10% equivalence zone) between the devices. Results Fitbit Flex produced similar SED and low MAPE (mean difference [MD] = 37 min/day, P = .21, MAPE = 6.8%), but significantly higher MVPA and relatively large MAPE (MD = 59–77 min/day, P < .0001, MAPE = 56.6–74.3%) compared with the estimates from GT3X+ using three different cut-points. The correlations between Fitbit Flex and GT3X+ were consistently higher for SED (r = 0.90, ρ = 0.86, P < .01), but weaker for MVPA (r = 0.65–0.76, ρ = 0.69–0.79, P < .01). BA plots revealed that there is no apparent bias in estimating SED. Conclusion In comparison with the GT3X+ accelerometer, the Fitbit Flex provided comparatively accurate estimates of SED, but the Fitbit Flex overestimated MVPA under free-living conditions. Future investigations using the Fitbit Flex should be aware of present findings.
topic Physical activity
Sedentary behavior
Validity
Accelerometer
Public health
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12874-019-0668-1
work_keys_str_mv AT nicklausredenius concurrentvalidityofthefitbitforassessingsedentarybehaviorandmoderatetovigorousphysicalactivity
AT youngwonkim concurrentvalidityofthefitbitforassessingsedentarybehaviorandmoderatetovigorousphysicalactivity
AT wonwoobyun concurrentvalidityofthefitbitforassessingsedentarybehaviorandmoderatetovigorousphysicalactivity
_version_ 1725312508416229376