Dataset Information

Validity of the Apple Watch^® for monitoring push counts in people using manual wheelchairs.

ABSTRACT: Objective: A recent Apple Watch^® activity-monitoring innovation permits manual wheelchair users to monitor daily push counts. This study evaluated the validity of the Apple Watch^® push count estimate.Design: Criterion validity.Setting: Southern Finland and Southeast Queensland, Australia.Participants: Twenty-six manual wheelchair users from Finland and Australia were filmed completing a standardized battery of activities while wearing the Apple Watch^® (dominant wrist).Outcome Measures: Wheelchair pushes as determined by the Apple Watch^® were compared to directly observed pushes.Results: Agreement between Apple Watch^® push counts and directly observed pushes was evaluated using Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), Pearson correlations and Bland-Altman analyses. Apple Watch^® pushes and directly observed push counts were strongly correlated (ICC = 0.77, P < 0.01) (r = 0.84, P < 0.01). Bland Altman plots indicated that the Apple Watch^® underestimated push counts (M = -103; 95% ULoA = 217; LLoA = -423 pushes). Mean absolute percentage error was 13.5% which is comparable to studies evaluating agreement between pedometer-based step counts and directly observed steps.Conclusion: Apple Watch^® push-count estimates are acceptable for personal, self-monitoring purposes and for research entailing group-level analyses, but less acceptable where accurate push-count measures for an individual is required.

SUBMITTER: Karinharju KS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7952070 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Validity of the Apple Watch® for monitoring push counts in people using manual wheelchairs.

Karinharju Kati S KS Boughey Alexandra M AM Tweedy Sean M SM Clanchy Kelly M KM Trost Stewart G SG Gomersall Sjaan R SR

The journal of spinal cord medicine 20190227 2

Objective: A recent Apple Watch® activity-monitoring innovation permits manual wheelchair users to monitor daily push counts. This study evaluated the validity of the Apple Watch® push count estimate.Design: Criterion validity.Setting: Southern Finland and Southeast Queensland, Australia.Participants: Twenty-six manual wheelchair users from Finland and Australia were filmed completing a standardized battery of activities while wearing the Apple W ...[more]

PMID: 30811310

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundStep counting is comparable among many research-grade and consumer-grade accelerometers in laboratory settings.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to compare the agreement between Actical and Apple Watch step-counting in a community setting.MethodsAmong Third Generation Framingham Heart Study participants (N=3486), we examined the agreement of step-counting between those who wore a consumer-grade accelerometer (Apple Watch Series 0) and a research-grade accelerometer (Actical) on the same days. Secondarily, we examined the agreement during each hour when both devices were worn to account for differences in wear time between devices.ResultsWe studied 523 participants (n=3223 person-days, mean age 51.7, SD 8.9 years; women: n=298, 57.0%). Between devices, we observed modest correlation (intraclass correlation [ICC] 0.56, 95% CI 0.54-0.59), poor continuous agreement (29.7%, n=957 of days having steps counts with ≤15% difference), a mean difference of 499 steps per day higher count by Actical, and wide limits of agreement, roughly ±9000 steps per day. However, devices showed stronger agreement in identifying who meets various steps per day thresholds (eg, at 8000 steps per day, kappa coefficient=0.49), for which devices were concordant for 74.8% (n=391) of participants. In secondary analyses, in the hours during which both devices were worn (n=456 participants, n=18,760 person-hours), the correlation was much stronger (ICC 0.86, 95% CI 0.85-0.86), but continuous agreement remained poor (27.3%, n=5115 of hours having step counts with ≤15% difference) between devices and was slightly worse for those with mobility limitations or obesity.ConclusionsOur investigation suggests poor overall agreement between steps counted by the Actical device and those counted by the Apple Watch device, with stronger agreement in discriminating who meets certain step thresholds. The impact of these challenges may be minimized if accelerometers are used by individuals to determine whether they are meeting physical activity guidelines or tracking step counts. It is also possible that some of the limitations of these older accelerometers may be improved in newer devices.

Dataset Information

Validity of the Apple Watch^® for monitoring push counts in people using manual wheelchairs.

Publications

Validity of the Apple Watch<sup>®</sup> for monitoring push counts in people using manual wheelchairs.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets