Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 5 Fitbit and Jawbone reliability studies (listed by author's last name and publication year)

From: Systematic review of the validity and reliability of consumer-wearable activity trackers

  Sample characteristics Tracker wearing protocol Measurements Interdevice reliability results
Author (year) n % female Activity Lab/field Type Placement Measures
Adam Noah et. al (2013) [29] 16 38 Treadmill walking (3.5 mph), walking with incline (3.5 mph at 5 %), jogging (5.5 mph), and stair stepping (30.5 centimeter step at 96 beats/min) Lab Ultra (Fitbit) Waist (1 on each side) Steps/min, kilocalories/min ICC comparing 2 different devices worn at once: range 0.76-0.99 (steps), range 0.91-0.97 (kilocalories)
23 43 Classic (Fitbit) Waist (1 on each side) Steps/min, kilocalories/min Comparing 2 different devices worn at once: ICC = average 0.88, range 0.86-0.91 (steps); average 0.87, range 0.74-0.92 (kilocalories)
Diaz (2015) [15] 23 57 6 min each of treadmill walking (1.9 mph, 3.0 mph, 4.0 mph) and jogging (5.2 mph) Lab One (Fitbit) 2 on right hip, 1 on left hip Steps/min, kilocalories/min Pearson CC left and right hips: 0.99 (steps), 0.97 (kilocalories); Pearson CC two right hip devices: 0.99 (steps), 0.96 (kilocalories)
Flex (Fitbit) 1 on each wrist Steps/min, kilocalories/min Pearson CC left and right wrists: 0.90 (steps), 0.95 (kilocalories)
Dontje (2015) [32] 1 0 8 consecutive days excluding sleep and water-based activities Field Ultra (Fitbit) 5 over left pants pocket, 5 over right pants pocket Steps/min, steps/hour, steps/day 10 devices collected movement (yes vs no) across minutes (98 %); two-way median ICC of absolute agreement 0.90 (steps/min), 1.00 (steps/hour), 1.00 (steps/day); concordance CC 0.90 (steps/min), 1.00 (steps/hour), 0.99 (steps/day); from Bland-Altman plots 95 % of the measures were within the boundaries of 28 steps above and below the mean difference; maximum difference for all devices was 3.3 %
Mammen (2012) [36] 1 0 6 trials were performed while the researcher wore the devices and walked 20 steps Lab Ultra (Fitbit) 3 trials on right hip, 3 trials on left hip Steps/trial All trackers were within +/−5 % of each other
Meltzer (2015) [37] 9 Not reported 1 night's sleep Lab Ultra (Fitbit) 2 on nondominant wrist TST, sleep efficiency Among n = 7: no differences between trackers for TST (468.7 vs. 471.1 min normal mode; 300.4 vs. 289.9 min sensitive mode) or sleep efficiency (92.9 % vs. 93.3 % normal mode; 59.4 % vs. 57.4 % sensitive mode)
Montgomery- Downs (2012) [38] 3 Not reported 1 night's sleep Lab Classic (Fitbit) 2 on nondominant wrist Sleep vs. wake 3 participant's recorded 96.5 %, 99.1 %, and 97.6 % agreement at 1-minute epochs
Takacs (2014) [43] 30 50 5 min each of treadmill walking (0.90, 1.12, 1.33, 1.54, 1.78 meters/second) Lab One (Fitbit) 1 on the waist at each hip, 1 in front pocket of the dominant leg Steps/trial, distance/trial Across 5 treadmill speeds ICC: range 0.95-1.00 (steps), range 0.90-0.99 (distance)
  1. Abbreviations: CC correlation coefficient, EE energy expenditure, ICC intraclass correlation coefficient, min minute, mph miles per hour, TST total sleep time