The validity and reliability of consumer-grade activity trackers in older, community-dwelling adults: a systematic review
Open accessAbstract
Objective To understand the validity and reliability of consumer-grade activity trackers (consumer wearables) in older, community-dwelling adults.Methods A systematic review of studies involving adults aged over 65 years who underwent physical activity monitoring with consumer wearables. A total of 7 observational studies qualified, identified from electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and others (2014-2018). Validity was interpreted using correlation coefficients (CC) and percentage error for agreement between reference devices or gold-standard validation methods Reliability was compared using mean differences or ranges (under- or overestimation) of step count and activity time.Results Total sample size was 290 adults, mean age of 70.2 ± 4.8 years and females constituting 46.7 ± 26.1%. The studies evaluated eight different consumer wearables used by community-dwelling adults with a range of co-morbidities. Daily step count for all consumer wearables correlated highly with validation criterion, especially the ActiGraph device: intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were 0.94 for Fitbit One, 0.94 for Zip, 0.86 for Charge HR and 0.96 for Misfit Shine. Slower walking pace and impaired ambulation reduced the levels of agreement. Daily step count captured by Fitbit Zip was on average 7117 (±5,880.6), which was overestimated by five of the eight consumer wearables compared with reference devices (range 167.6-2,690.3 steps/day). Measurement of activity duration was accurate compared with reference devices, yet less so than step count.Conclusion In older, community-dwelling adults, consumer wearables accurately measure step count and activity duration, as confirmed by reference devices and validation methods Further research is required to understand how co-morbidities, gait and activity levels interact with monitoring in free-living environments.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Several consumer-grade PA sensors contributing to the current thematic synthesis were also evaluated in the aforementioned review.
“Several of the consumer-grade PA sensors contributing to the current thematic synthesis were also evaluated in the aforementioned review.”
The reliability of daily step counts varied considerably across PA sensors, with gait, device placement, and walking speed influencing reliability.
“However, the reliability of daily step counts varied considerably across PA sensors, with gait, device placement, and walking speed influencing reliability.”
A systematic review assessing consumer-grade PA sensors in older adults reported high accuracy for average daily step counts compared to research-grade reference PA sensors.
“A systematic review assessing consumer-grade PA sensors in older adults (mean age 70.2, SD 4.8 y) reported high accuracy for average daily step counts compared to research-grade reference PA sensors [41].”
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 26 · Cited by 147
- Authors
- Straiton, N., Alharbi, M., Bauman, A., Neubeck, L., Gullick, J., Bhindi, R., & Gallagher, R.
- Affiliations
- The University of Sydney (AU)
- Edinburgh Napier University (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Straiton, Nicola
- Venue
- Maturitas
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-06
- Volume
- 112
- Pages
- 85-93
- ISSN
- 0378-5122 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2794488526
- Cited by
- 147
- References
- 26
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 3
- FWCI
- 2.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Licence
- Locations
- Maturitas (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Edinburgh Napier Research Repository (Edinburgh Napier University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- UTS ePRESS (University of Technology Sydney) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Context-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
- Keywords
- wearable devices, physical activity monitoring, older adults, community-dwelling adults, step count accuracy, activity duration, device validation, Fitbit, ActiGraph, walking speed, measurement reliability
- MeSH terms
- Fitness Trackers, Aged, Humans, Reproducibility of Results, Exercise, Actigraphy, Independent Living
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review