Cited by 181Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsInnovative Human-Technology InteractionPhysical Activity and Health

Users' experiences of wearable activity trackers: a cross-sectional study

Open access
Maher, Carol, Ryan, Jillian, Ambrosi, Christina, Edney, Sarah·2017·BMC Public Health

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Wearable activity trackers offer considerable promise for helping users to adopt healthier lifestyles. This study aimed to explore users' experience of activity trackers, including usage patterns, sharing of data to social media, perceived behaviour change (physical activity, diet and sleep), and technical issues/barriers to use. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was developed and administered to Australian adults who were current or former activity tracker users. Results were analysed descriptively, with differences between current and former users and wearable brands explored using independent samples t-tests, Mann-Whitney, and chi square tests. RESULTS: Participants included 200 current and 37 former activity tracker users (total N = 237) with a mean age of 33.1 years (SD 12.4, range 18-74 years). Fitbit (67.5%) and Garmin devices (16.5%) were most commonly reported. Participants typically used their trackers for sustained periods (5-7 months) and most intended to continue usage. Participants reported they had improved their physical activity (51-81%) more commonly than they had their diet (14-40%) or sleep (11-24%), and slightly more participants reported to value the real time feedback (89%) compared to the long-term monitoring (78%). Most users (70%) reported they had experienced functionality issues with their devices, most commonly related to battery life and technical difficulties. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest users find activity trackers appealing and useful tools for increasing perceived physical activity levels over a sustained period.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12889-017-4888-1

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Wearable activity trackers are affordable, visually appealing, user-friendly, and encourage lifestyle physical activity, reducing barriers associated with more structured physical activity.

    “Wearable activity trackers offer an appealing, low-cost tool to address physical inactivity.”

    From Effectiveness of wearable activity trackers to increase physical activity and improve health: a systematic review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. (2022) · cites this paper as [4]

    The Conclusions describe trackers as appealing tools for intervening on physical activity, and report that most users perceived an increase in their activity. The paper does not describe trackers as low-cost; the Discussion instead says they are far more expensive than conventional pedometers. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Maher, C., Ryan, J., Ambrosi, C., & Edney, S.
Affiliations
University of South Australia (AU)
Corresponding author
Maher, Carol
Venue
BMC Public Health
Published
2017-11-15
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
880-880
ISSN
1471-2458 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2770689260
Cited by
180
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 7
FWCI
28.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • BMC Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Australasian Journal of Paramedicine (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • National University of Singapore (submittedVersion)
  • UniSA Research Outputs Repository (University of South Australia) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
University of South Australia
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
Keywords
wearable activity trackers, user experience, physical activity, diet, sleep, real-time feedback, battery life, Fitbit, Garmin, technology adoption, health behavior change
MeSH terms
Fitness Trackers, Wearable Electronic Devices, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Australia, Cross-Sectional Studies, Diet, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sleep, Health Behavior, Exercise, Young Adult, Social Media

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