Researchers, practitioners, and public health organizations from around the world are becoming increasingly interested in using data from consumer-grade devices such as smartphones and wearable activity trackers to measure physical activity (PA). Indeed, large-scale, easily accessible, and autonomous data collection concerning PA as well as other health behaviors is becoming ever more attractive. There are several benefits of using consumer-grade devices to collect PA data including the ability to obtain big data, retrospectively as well as prospectively, and to understand individual-level PA patterns over time and in response to natural events. However, there are challenges related to representativeness, data access, and proprietary algorithms that, at present, limit the utility of this data in understanding population-level PA. In this brief report we aim to highlight the benefits, as well as the limitations, of using existing data from smartphones and wearable activity trackers to understand large-scale PA patterns and stimulate discussion among the scientific community on what the future holds with respect to PA measurement and surveillance.
Browse
Should We Use Activity Tracker Data From Smartphones and Wearables to Understand Population Physical Activity Patterns?
Jacqueline L. Mair, Lawrence D. Hayes, Amy K. Campbell, and Nicholas Sculthorpe
A Transparent Method for Step Detection Using an Acceleration Threshold
Scott W. Ducharme, Jongil Lim, Michael A. Busa, Elroy J. Aguiar, Christopher C. Moore, John M. Schuna Jr., Tiago V. Barreira, John Staudenmayer, Stuart R. Chipkin, and Catrine Tudor-Locke
Step-based metrics provide simple measures of ambulatory activity, yet device software either includes undisclosed proprietary step detection algorithms or simply does not compute step-based metrics. We aimed to develop and validate a simple algorithm to accurately detect steps across various ambulatory and nonambulatory activities. Seventy-five adults (21–39 years) completed seven simulated activities of daily living (e.g., sitting, vacuuming, folding laundry) and an incremental treadmill protocol from 0.22 to 2.2 m/s. Directly observed steps were hand-tallied. Participants wore GENEActiv and ActiGraph accelerometers, one of each on their waist and on their nondominant wrist. Raw acceleration (g) signals from the anterior–posterior, medial–lateral, vertical, and vector magnitude directions were assessed separately for each device. Signals were demeaned across all activities and band-pass filtered (0.25, 2.5 Hz). Steps were detected via peak picking, with optimal thresholds (i.e., minimized absolute error from accumulated hand counted) determined by iterating minimum acceleration values to detect steps. Step counts were converted into cadence (steps/minute), and k-fold cross-validation quantified error (root mean squared error [RMSE]). We report optimal thresholds for use of either device on the waist (threshold = 0.0267g) and wrist (threshold = 0.0359g) using the vector magnitude signal. These thresholds yielded low error for the waist (RMSE < 173 steps, ≤2.28 steps/min) and wrist (RMSE < 481 steps, ≤6.47 steps/min) across all activities, and outperformed ActiLife’s proprietary algorithm (RMSE = 1,312 and 2,913 steps, 17.29 and 38.06 steps/min for the waist and wrist, respectively). The thresholds reported herein provide a simple, transparent framework for step detection using accelerometers during treadmill ambulation and activities of daily living for waist- and wrist-worn locations.
Validity of a Global Positioning System-Based Algorithm and Consumer Wearables for Classifying Active Trips in Children and Adults
Chelsea Steel, Katie Crist, Amanda Grimes, Carolina Bejarano, Adrian Ortega, Paul R. Hibbing, Jasper Schipperijn, and Jordan A. Carlson
Objective: To investigate the convergent validity of a global positioning system (GPS)-based and two consumer-based measures with trip logs for classifying pedestrian, cycling, and vehicle trips in children and adults. Methods: Participants (N = 34) wore a Qstarz GPS tracker, Fitbit Alta, and Garmin vivosmart 3 on multiple days and logged their outdoor pedestrian, cycling, and vehicle trips. Logged trips were compared with device-measured trips using the Personal Activity Location Measurement System (PALMS) GPS-based algorithms, Fitbit’s SmartTrack, and Garmin’s Move IQ. Trip- and day-level agreement were tested. Results: The PALMS identified and correctly classified the mode of 75.6%, 94.5%, and 96.9% of pedestrian, cycling, and vehicle trips (84.5% of active trips, F1 = 0.84 and 0.87) as compared with the log. Fitbit and Garmin identified and correctly classified the mode of 26.8% and 17.8% (22.6% of active trips, F1 = 0.40 and 0.30) and 46.3% and 43.8% (45.2% of active trips, F1 = 0.58 and 0.59) of pedestrian and cycling trips. Garmin was more prone to false positives (false trips not logged). Day-level agreement for PALMS and Garmin versus logs was favorable across trip modes, though PALMS performed best. Fitbit significantly underestimated daily cycling. Results were similar but slightly less favorable for children than adults. Conclusions: The PALMS showed good convergent validity in children and adults and were about 50% and 27% more accurate than Fitbit and Garmin (based on F1). Empirically-based recommendations for improving PALMS’ pedestrian classification are provided. Since the consumer devices capture both indoor and outdoor walking/running and cycling, they are less appropriate for trip-based research.
Volume 4 (2021): Issue S1 (Oct 2021)
Impact of Reduced Sampling Rate on Accelerometer-Based Physical Activity Monitoring and Machine Learning Activity Classification
Scott Small, Sara Khalid, Paula Dhiman, Shing Chan, Dan Jackson, Aiden Doherty, and Andrew Price
Purpose: Lowering the sampling rate of accelerometers in physical activity research can dramatically increase study monitoring periods through longer battery life; however, the effect of reduced sampling rate on activity metric validity is poorly documented. We therefore aimed to assess the effect of reduced sampling rate on measuring physical activity both overall and by specific behavior types. Methods: Healthy adults wore sets of two Axivity AX3 accelerometers on the dominant wrist and hip for 24 hr. At each location one accelerometer recorded at 25 Hz and the other at 100 Hz. Overall acceleration magnitude, time in moderate to vigorous activity, and behavioral activities were calculated and processed using both linear and nearest neighbor resampling. Correlation between acceleration magnitude and activity classifications at both sampling rates was calculated and linear regression was performed. Results: Of the 54 total participants, 45 contributed >20 hr of hip wear time and 51 contributed >20 hr of wrist wear time. Strong correlation was observed between 25- and 100-Hz sampling rates in overall activity measurement (r = .97–.99), yet consistently lower activity was observed in data collected at 25 Hz (3.1%–13.9%). Reduced sleep and light activity and increased sedentary time was classified in 25-Hz data by machine learning models. Discrepancies were greater when linear interpolation resampling was used in postprocessing. Conclusions: The 25- and 100-Hz accelerometer data are highly correlated with predictable differences, which can be accounted for in interstudy comparisons. Sampling rate and resampling methods should be consistently reported in physical activity studies, carefully considered in study design, and tailored to the outcome of interest.
Impact of ActiGraph Sampling Rate and Intermonitor Comparability on Measures of Physical Activity in Adults
Kimberly A. Clevenger, Jan Christian Brønd, Daniel Arvidsson, Alexander H.K. Montoye, Kelly A. Mackintosh, Melitta A. McNarry, and Karin A. Pfeiffer
Background: ActiGraph is a commonly used, research-grade accelerometer brand, but there is little information regarding intermonitor comparability of newer models. In addition, while sampling rate has been shown to influence accelerometer metrics, its influence on measures of free-living physical activity has not been directly studied. Purpose: To examine differences in physical activity metrics due to intermonitor variability and chosen sampling rate. Methods: Adults (n = 20) wore two hip-worn ActiGraph wGT3X-BT monitors for 1 week, with one accelerometer sampling at 30 Hz and the other at 100 Hz, which was downsampled to 30 Hz. Activity intensity was classified using vector magnitude, Euclidean Norm Minus One (ENMO), and mean amplitude deviation (MAD) cut points. Equivalence testing compared outcomes. Results: There was a lack of intermonitor equivalence for ENMO, time in sedentary/light- or moderate-intensity activity according to ENMO cut points, and time in moderate-intensity activity according to MAD cut points. Between sampling rates, differences existed for time in moderate-intensity activity according to vector magnitude, ENMO, and MAD cut points, and time in sedentary/light-intensity activity according to ENMO cut points. While mean differences were small (0.1–1.7 percentage points), this would equate to differences in moderate-to vigorous-intensity activity over a 10-hr wear day of 3.6 (MAD) to 10.8 (ENMO) min/day for intermonitor comparisons or 3.6 (vector magnitude) to 5.4 (ENMO) min/day for sampling rate. Conclusions: Epoch-level intermonitor differences were larger than differences due to sampling rate, but both may impact outcomes such as time spent in each activity intensity. ENMO was the least comparable metric between monitors or sampling rates.
The 7th International Conference on Ambulatory Monitoring of Physical Activity and Movement
Volume 4 (2021): Issue 3 (Sep 2021)
Correlates of the Adherence to a 24-hr Wrist-Worn Accelerometer Protocol in a Sample of High School Students
Marcus V.V. Lopes, Bruno G.G. da Costa, Luis E.A. Malheiros, Rafael M. Costa, Ana C.C. Souza, Inacio Crochemore-Silva, and Kelly S. Silva
This study (a) compared accelerometer wear time and compliance between distinct wrist-worn accelerometer data collection plans, (b) analyzed participants’ perception of using accelerometers, and (c) identified sociodemographic and behavioral correlates of accelerometer compliance. A sample of high school students (n = 143) wore accelerometers attached to the wrist by a disposable polyvinyl chloride (PVC) wristband or a reusable fabric wristband for 24 hr over 6 days. Those who wore the reusable fabric band, but not their peers, were instructed to remove the device during water-based activities. Participants answered a questionnaire about sociodemographic and behavioral characteristics and reported their experience wearing the accelerometer. We computed non-wear time and checked participants’ compliance with wear-time criteria (i.e., at least three valid weekdays and one valid weekend day) considering two valid day definitions separately (i.e., at least 16 and 23 hours of accelerometer data). Participants who wore a disposable band had greater compliance compared with those who wore a reusable band for both 16-hr (93% vs. 76%, respectively) and 23-hr valid day definitions (91% vs. 50%, respectively). High schoolers with the following characteristics were less likely to comply with wear time criteria if they (a) engaged in labor-intensive activities, (b) perceived that wearing the monitor hindered their daily activities, or (c) felt ashamed while wearing the accelerometer. In conclusion, the data collection plan composed of using disposable wristbands and not removing the monitor resulted in greater 24-hr accelerometer wear time and compliance. However, a negative experience in using the accelerometer may be a barrier to high schoolers’ adherence to rigorous protocols.
Association Between Accelerometer and Parental Reported Weekend and Weekday Sleeping Patterns and Adiposity Among Preschool-Aged Children
Bridget Coyle-Asbil, Hannah J. Coyle-Asbil, David W.L. Ma, Jess Haines, and Lori Ann Vallis
Sleep is vital for healthy development of young children; however, it is not understood how the quality and quantity vary between the weekends and weekdays (WE–WD). Research focused on older children has demonstrated that there is significant WE–WD variability and that this is associated with adiposity. It is unclear how this is experienced among preschoolers. This study explored: (a) the accuracy of WE–WD sleep as reported in parental logbooks compared with accelerometers; (b) the difference between WE and WD total sleep time, sleep efficiency, and timing, as assessed by accelerometers; and (c) the association between the variability of these metrics and adiposity. Eighty-seven preschoolers (M = 46; 4.48 ± 0.89 years) wore an accelerometer on their right hip for 7 days. Parents were given logbooks to track “lights out” times (sleep onset) and out of bed time (sleep offset). Compared with accelerometers, parental logbook reports indicated earlier sleep onset and later sleep offset times on both WEs and WDs. Accelerometer-derived total sleep time, sleep efficiency, and onset/offset were not significantly different on the WEs and WDs; however, a sex effect was observed, with males going to bed and waking up earlier than females. Correlation analyses revealed that variability of sleep onset times throughout the week was positively correlated with percentage of fat mass in children. Results suggest that variability of sleep onset may be associated with increased adiposity in preschool children. Additional research with larger and more socioeconomically and racially diverse samples is needed to confirm these findings.