|
|
Study suggests smartphone apps more accurate than fitness trackers
|
|
|
|
MacNN Staff
Join Date: Jul 2012
Status:
Offline
|
|
People looking to track their exercise may want to avoid spending money on fitness tracker and stick with smartphone apps, a study from the University of Pennsylvania claims. In tests, researchers from the Perelman School of Medicine and the Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics found that smartphone apps counting steps were more accurate than those of fitness trackers attached to the wrist.
The tests involved the use of a treadmill, with 14 healthy participants walking for 500 steps and 1,500 steps multiple times. While walking, the subjects wore the Digi-Walker SW-200, Fitbit One, and Fitbit Zip at the waist, the Fitbit Flex, Jawbone Up24, and the Nike Fuelband on the wrist. The iPhone 5s running the Fitbit, Health Mate, and Moves apps represented smartphones, alongside the Samsung Galaxy S4 running the Moves app, with both devices located in pants pockets.
Compared to the observed total, the smartphone apps reported step counts between 6.7 percent under and 6.2 percent above the actual value. The fitness trackers on the wrist under-reported the step count from between 1.5 percent to 22.7 percent. Lastly, the waist-mounted pedometers proved to be the most accurate, being between 0.3 percent under and 1 percent over the actual figure.
"Compared to the one to two percent of adults in the US that own a wearable device, more than 65 percent of adults carry a smartphone," commented assistant professor of the Medicine and Health Care Management at the University of Pennsylvania Mitesh S. Patel. "Our findings suggest that smartphone apps could prove to be a more widely accessible and affordable way of tracking health behaviors."
(
Last edited by NewsPoster; Feb 12, 2015 at 10:35 AM.
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Newport News,VA,USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
How do you reconcile the following from the first paragraph :
"smartphone apps counting steps were more accurate than those of fitness trackers attached to the waist and wrist."
With this from the next to last paragraph? :
"Lastly, the waist-mounted pedometers proved to be the most accurate, being between 0.3 percent under and 1 percent over the actual figure. "
Even a quick glance at the charts shows that the Fitbit One and Zip are both immensely more accurate than any of the smartphone Apps.
|
Beware of geeks bearing Gifs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: South Wales, UK
Status:
Offline
|
|
Apologies for the inconsistency, it should have been removed after putting in the pedometer sections and realising they were better performers. It has been corrected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Newport News,VA,USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Thank you, very nice to know that someone is monitoring the comments!
|
Beware of geeks bearing Gifs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Aug 2008
Status:
Offline
|
|
I would lobby that fitness trackers, even though they might not be as accurate as an app, are more precise because they are always on and always on you. An app might win and activity, but Dedicated wins precision for the day. Plus less phone fiddling.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Aug 2008
Status:
Offline
|
|
Also I can verify that the wrist position underreports when holding a baby pacing for an hour in the middle of the night. Tracker works fine on actual runs or walks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|