A1 Journal article (refereed)
Validity of three smartwatches in estimating energy expenditure during outdoor walking and running (2022)


Le, S., Wang, X., Zhang, T., Lei, S. M., Cheng, S., Yao, W., & Schumann, M. (2022). Validity of three smartwatches in estimating energy expenditure during outdoor walking and running. Frontiers in Physiology, 13, Article 995575. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2022.995575


JYU authors or editors


Publication details

All authors or editorsLe, Shenglong; Wang, Xiuqiang; Zhang, Tao; Lei, Si Man; Cheng, Sulin; Yao, Wu; Schumann, Moritz

Journal or seriesFrontiers in Physiology

eISSN1664-042X

Publication year2022

Publication date26/09/2022

Volume13

Article number995575

PublisherFrontiers Media SA

Publication countrySwitzerland

Publication languageEnglish

DOIhttps://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2022.995575

Publication open accessOpenly available

Publication channel open accessOpen Access channel

Publication is parallel published (JYX)https://jyx.jyu.fi/handle/123456789/83852

Publication is parallel publishedhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9549133/


Abstract

Commercially wrist-worn devices often present inaccurate estimations of energy expenditure (EE), with large between-device differences. We aimed to assess the validity of the Apple Watch Series 6 (AW), Garmin FENIX 6 (GF) and Huawei Watch GT 2e (HW) in estimating EE during outdoor walking and running. Twenty young normal-weight Chinese adults concurrently wore three index devices randomly positioned at both wrists during walking at 6 km/h and running at 10 km/h for 2 km on a 400- meter track. As a criterion, EE was assessed by indirect calorimetry (COSMED K5). For walking, EE from AW and GF was significantly higher than that obtained by the K5 (p < 0.001 and 0.002, respectively), but not for HW (p = 0.491). The mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) was 19.8% for AW, 32.0% for GF, and 9.9% for HW, respectively. The limits of agreement (LoA) were 44.1, 150.1 and 48.6 kcal for AW, GF, and HW respectively. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.821, 0.216 and 0.760 for AW, GF, and HW, respectively. For running, EE from AW and GF were significantly higher than the K5 (p < 0.001 and 0.001, respectively), but not for HW (p = 0.946). The MAPE was 24.4%, 21.8% and 11.9% for AW, GF and HW, respectively. LoA were 62.8, 89.4 and 65.6 kcal for AW, GF and HW, respectively. The ICC was 0.741, 0.594, and 0.698 for AW, GF and HW, respectively. The results indicate that the tested smartwatches show a moderate validity in EE estimations for outdoor walking and running.


Keywordsphysical activitywalking (motion)runningenergy consumption (metabolism)monitoringmeasuring instruments (indicators)wearable technologysmartwatchesvalidationprecision

Free keywordswearable devices; validation, accuracy; physical activity; health monitoring


Contributing organizations


Ministry reportingYes

Reporting Year2022

JUFO rating1


Last updated on 2024-15-06 at 22:26