Dataset Information

Criterion validity and reliability of a smartphone delivered sub-maximal fitness test for people with type 2 diabetes.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Prevention of multi-morbidities following non-communicable diseases requires a systematic registration of adverse modifiable risk factors, including low physical fitness. The aim of the study was to establish criterion validity and reliability of a smartphone app (InterWalk) delivered fitness test in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS:Patients with type 2 diabetes (N = 27, mean (SD) age 64.2 (5.9) years, BMI 30.0 (5.1) kg/m2, (30 % male)) completed a 7-min progressive walking protocol twice (with and without encouragement). VO2 during the test was assessed using indirect calorimetry and the acceleration (vector magnitude) from the smartphone was obtained. The vector magnitude was used to predict VO2peak along with the co-variates weight, height and sex. The validity of the algorithm was tested when the smartphone was placed in the right pocket of the pants or jacket. The algorithm was validated using leave-one-out cross validation. Test-retest reliability was tested in a subset of participants (N = 10). RESULTS:The overall VO2peak prediction of the algorithm (R2) was 0.60 and 0.45 when the smartphone was placed in the pockets of the pants and jacket, respectively (p < 0.001). The mean bias (limits of agreement) in the cross validation was-0.4 (38) % (pants) and-0.1 (46) % (jacket). When the smartphone was placed in the jacket a significant intensity dependent bias (r = 0.5, p = 0.02) was observed. The test-retest intraclass correlations were 0.85 and 0.86 (p < 0.001), for the pants and jacket, respectively. No effects of encouragement were observed on test performance. CONCLUSION:In conclusion, the InterWalk Fitness Test is accurate and reliable for persons with type 2 diabetes when the smartphone is placed in the side pocket of the pants for. The test could give a fair estimate of the CRF in absence of a progressive maximal test during standardized conditions with the appropriate equipment. TRIAL REGISTRATION:www.clinicaltrials.org (NCT02089477), first registered (prospectively) on March 14th 2014.

SUBMITTER: Brinklov CF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5290632 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Criterion validity and reliability of a smartphone delivered sub-maximal fitness test for people with type 2 diabetes.

Brinkløv Cecilie Fau CF Thorsen Ida Kær IK Karstoft Kristian K Brøns Charlotte C Valentiner Laura L Langberg Henning H Vaag Allan Arthur AA Nielsen Jens Steen JS Pedersen Bente Klarlund BK Ried-Larsen Mathias M

BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation 20161007

<h4>Background</h4>Prevention of multi-morbidities following non-communicable diseases requires a systematic registration of adverse modifiable risk factors, including low physical fitness. The aim of the study was to establish criterion validity and reliability of a smartphone app (InterWalk) delivered fitness test in patients with type 2 diabetes.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients with type 2 diabetes (<i>N =</i> 27, mean (SD) age 64.2 (5.9) years, BMI 30.0 (5.1) kg/m<sup>2</sup>, (30 % male)) completed ...[more]

PMID: 28174664

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere is strong evidence suggesting that higher levels of cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) are associated with a healthier metabolic profile, and that CRF can serve as a powerful predictor of morbidity and mortality. In this context, a smartphone app based on the 2-km walk test (UKK test) would provide the possibility to assess CRF remotely in individuals geographically distributed around a country or continent, and even between continents, with minimal equipment and low costs.ObjectiveThe overall aim of this study was to evaluate the validity and reliability of 2kmFIT-App developed for Android and iOS mobile operating systems to estimate maximum oxygen consumption (VO2max) as an indicator of CRF. The specific aims of the study were to determine the validity of 2kmFIT-App to track distance and calculate heart rate (HR).MethodsTwenty participants were included for field-testing validation and reliability analysis. The participants completed the UKK test twice using 2kmFIT-App. Distance and HR were measured with the app as well as with accurate methods, and VO2max was estimated using the UKK test equation.ResultsThe validity results showed the following mean differences (app minus criterion): distance (-70.40, SD 51.47 meters), time (-0.59, SD 0.45 minutes), HR (-16.75, SD 9.96 beats/minute), and VO2max (3.59, SD 2.01 ml/kg/min). There was moderate validity found for HR (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] 0.731, 95% CI -0.211 to 0.942) and good validity found for VO2max (ICC 0.878, 95% CI -0.125 to 0.972). The reliability results showed the following mean differences (retest minus test): app distance (25.99, SD 43.21 meters), app time (-0.15, SD 0.94 seconds), pace (-0.18, SD 0.33 min/km), app HR (-4.5, 13.44 beats/minute), and app VO2max (0.92, SD 3.04 ml/kg/min). There was good reliability for app HR (ICC 0.897, 95% CI 0.742-0.959) and excellent validity for app VO2max (ICC 0.932, 95% CI 0.830-0.973). All of these findings were observed when using the app with an Android operating system, whereas validity was poor when the app was used with iOS.ConclusionsThis study shows that 2kmFIT-App is a new, scientifically valid and reliable tool able to objectively and remotely estimate CRF, HR, and distance with an Android but not iOS mobile operating system. However, certain limitations such as the time required by 2kmFIT-App to calculate HR or the temperature environment should be considered when using the app.

Project description:BackgroundA patient's physical function plays a leading role in the treatment prescription for patients with cancer. Objective assessments of physical function may be more predictive for treatment tolerability and survival than frequently used subjective measures, such as the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group/World Health Organization (ECOG/WHO) performance score. The use of smartphones to measure physical activity and fitness may provide an excellent opportunity to objectively estimate a patient's physical function against low costs and little time. We investigated feasibility, validity and reliability of smartphone measurements of step count and physical fitness in patients with cancer.MethodsIn total, 72 patients participated. They wore a smartphone for 14 days to measure the mean number of steps per day, concomitant with an accelerometer during the first 7 days. Patients performed a six-minute walk test (6MWT) twice outdoors via a smartphone application and once in a test environment in the hospital. Feasibility was evaluated by the proportion of patients who completed the study as well as smartphone assessments of step count and physical fitness. Validity was assessed with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) between the accelerometer and the first week of the smartphone for step count, and between the 6MWT in the hospital and via the application for physical fitness. Test-retest reliability was assessed with the ICC between step count levels of the first and second week of smartphone assessments, and between the first and second six-minute walk test in the home environment.ResultsThe completeness of smartphone measurements was approximately 90% for step count and 64% for physical fitness assessments. Validity was excellent for step count (ICC = 0.97, p < 0.001) and fair for fitness (ICC = 0.47, p < 0.001). We found excellent test-retest reliability for step count (ICC = 0.91, p < 0.001) and physical fitness (ICC = 0.88, p < 0.001).ConclusionsThis study showed that objective smartphone measurements of step count in clinical practice are feasible, valid and reliable. These findings indicate that the use of smartphones to objectively assess physical activity in clinical cancer practice is promising and may be used to select patients for treatment and study participation, to monitor patients during treatment and to guide treatment decisions.

Project description:BACKGROUND:To assess whether commercial-grade activity monitors are appropriate for measuring step counts in older adults, it is essential to evaluate their measurement properties in this population. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to evaluate test-retest reliability and criterion validity of step counting in older adults with self-reported intact and limited mobility from 6 commercial-grade activity monitors: Fitbit Charge, Fitbit One, Garmin vívofit 2, Jawbone UP2, Misfit Shine, and New-Lifestyles NL-1000. METHODS:For test-retest reliability, participants completed two 100-step overground walks at a usual pace while wearing all monitors. We tested the effects of the activity monitor and mobility status on the absolute difference in step count error (%) and computed the standard error of measurement (SEM) between repeat trials. To assess criterion validity, participants completed two 400-meter overground walks at a usual pace while wearing all monitors. The first walk was continuous; the second walk incorporated interruptions to mimic the conditions of daily walking. Criterion step counts were from the researcher tally count. We estimated the effects of the activity monitor, mobility status, and walk interruptions on step count error (%). We also generated Bland-Altman plots and conducted equivalence tests. RESULTS:A total of 36 individuals participated (n=20 intact mobility and n=16 limited mobility; 19/36, 53% female) with a mean age of 71.4 (SD 4.7) years and BMI of 29.4 (SD 5.9) kg/m2. Considering test-retest reliability, there was an effect of the activity monitor (P<.001). The Fitbit One (1.0%, 95% CI 0.6% to 1.3%), the New-Lifestyles NL-1000 (2.6%, 95% CI 1.3% to 3.9%), and the Garmin vívofit 2 (6.0%, 95 CI 3.2% to 8.8%) had the smallest mean absolute differences in step count errors. The SEM values ranged from 1.0% (Fitbit One) to 23.5% (Jawbone UP2). Regarding criterion validity, all monitors undercounted the steps. Step count error was affected by the activity monitor (P<.001) and walk interruptions (P=.02). Three monitors had small mean step count errors: Misfit Shine (-1.3%, 95% CI -19.5% to 16.8%), Fitbit One (-2.1%, 95% CI -6.1% to 2.0%), and New-Lifestyles NL-1000 (-4.3%, 95 CI -18.9% to 10.3%). Mean step count error was larger during interrupted walking than continuous walking (-5.5% vs -3.6%; P=.02). Bland-Altman plots illustrated nonsystematic bias and small limits of agreement for Fitbit One and Jawbone UP2. Mean step count error lay within an equivalence bound of ±5% for Fitbit One (P<.001) and Misfit Shine (P=.001). CONCLUSIONS:Test-retest reliability and criterion validity of step counting varied across 6 consumer-grade activity monitors worn by older adults with self-reported intact and limited mobility. Walk interruptions increased the step count error for all monitors, whereas mobility status did not affect the step count error. The hip-worn Fitbit One was the only monitor with high test-retest reliability and criterion validity.

Project description:IntroductionCardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) testing is routinely performed by most armed and tactical forces around the world as part of their recruitment process for new members or simply as an annual examination of their personnel. A 2-mile run (2MR) test is among the most commonly used. However, as it is performed outdoors, weather, climate, and terrain can influence the results and often limit the maximum performance. Also, this test has been shown to be difficult for individuals because the pacing strategy is self-paced. As such, it does not reflect the real situation on the battlefield, where most activities are externally driven by the environment and the enemy. Therefore, we believe that the 30-15 Intermittent Fitness Test (30-15IFT) may be a suitable tool for measuring CRF and battle readiness of military personnel. Moreover, given the importance of visual attention to military personnel we aim to investigate the differences in visual attention between better and less physically prepared infantry members and its corresponding response to maximal endurance running test.Methods and analysisThis randomized cross-over study using a within-subjects test-retest design will enroll 32 infantry members of the Slovenian Armed Forces. To investigate the reliability and validity of the 30-15IFT test, an incremental treadmill test (TR), a 2MR test, and two identical 30-15IFT will be performed in randomized order. Additionally, participants will be subsequently divided into two groups based on their score on the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT), whereas differences in visual attention will be assessed by using the d2 test. The primary analysis will assess differences in key physiological outcomes between the different CRF tests (TR vs. 2MR vs. 30-15IFT). In addition, the relative reliability of all dependent variables between two 30-15IFT trials will be estimated by interclass correlation coefficient (ICC), while relationship between maximal oxygen uptake, heart rate and maximal running speed of 30-15IFT, TR and 2MR will be assessed using Pearson's correlation.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from the National Medical Ethics Committee (reference number: 0120-495/2021/6). The results of the proposed study will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals.Clinical trial registration[www.ClinicalTrials.gov], identifier [NCT05218798].

Dataset Information

Criterion validity and reliability of a smartphone delivered sub-maximal fitness test for people with type 2 diabetes.

Publications

Criterion validity and reliability of a smartphone delivered sub-maximal fitness test for people with type 2 diabetes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets