Activity trackers can potentially stimulate users to increase their physical activity behavior. The aim of this study was to examine the reliability and validity of ten consumer activity trackers for measuring step count in both laboratory and free-living conditions. Healthy adult volunteers (n = 33) walked twice on a treadmill (4.8 km/h) for 30 min while wearing ten different activity trackers (i.e. Lumoback, Fitbit Flex, Jawbone Up, Nike+ Fuelband SE, Misfit Shine, Withings Pulse, Fitbit Zip, Omron HJ-203, Yamax Digiwalker SW-200 and Moves mobile application). In free-living conditions, 56 volunteers wore the same activity trackers for one working day. Test-retest reliability was analyzed with the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). Validity was evaluated by comparing each tracker with the gold standard (Optogait system for laboratory and ActivPAL for free-living conditions), using paired samples t-tests, mean absolute percentage errors, correlations and Bland-Altman plots. Test-retest analysis revealed high reliability for most trackers except for the Omron (ICC .14), Moves app (ICC .37) and Nike+ Fuelband (ICC .53). The mean absolute percentage errors of the trackers in laboratory and free-living conditions respectively, were: Lumoback (−0.2, −0.4), Fibit Flex (−5.7, 3.7), Jawbone Up (−1.0, 1.4), Nike+ Fuelband (−18, −24), Misfit Shine (0.2, 1.1), Withings Pulse (−0.5, −7.9), Fitbit Zip (−0.3, 1.2), Omron (2.5, −0.4), Digiwalker (−1.2, −5.9), and Moves app (9.6, −37.6). Bland-Altman plots demonstrated that the limits of agreement varied from 46 steps (Fitbit Zip) to 2422 steps (Nike+ Fuelband) in the laboratory condition, and 866 steps (Fitbit Zip) to 5150 steps (Moves app) in the free-living condition. The reliability and validity of most trackers for measuring step count is good. The Fitbit Zip is the most valid whereas the reliability and validity of the Nike+ Fuelband is low.

To examine the test–retest reliability and validity of ten activity trackers for step counting at three different walking speeds. Thirty-one healthy participants walked twice on a treadmill for 30 min while wearing 10 activity trackers (Polar Loop, Garmin Vivosmart, Fitbit Charge HR, Apple Watch Sport, Pebble Smartwatch, Samsung Gear S, Misfit Flash, Jawbone Up Move, Flyfit, and Moves). Participants walked three walking speeds for 10 min each; slow (3.2 km·h−1), average (4.8 km·h−1), and vigorous (6.4 km·h−1). To measure test–retest reliability, intraclass correlations (ICC) were determined between the first and second treadmill test. Validity was determined by comparing the trackers with the gold standard (hand counting), using mean differences, mean absolute percentage errors, and ICC. Statistical differences were calculated by paired-sample t tests, Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, and by constructing Bland–Altman plots. Test–retest reliability varied with ICC ranging from −0.02 to 0.97. Validity varied between trackers and different walking speeds with mean differences between the gold standard and activity trackers ranging from 0.0 to 26.4%. Most trackers showed relatively low ICC and broad limits of agreement of the Bland–Altman plots at the different speeds. For the slow walking speed, the Garmin Vivosmart and Fitbit Charge HR showed the most accurate results. The Garmin Vivosmart and Apple Watch Sport demonstrated the best accuracy at an average walking speed. For vigorous walking, the Apple Watch Sport, Pebble Smartwatch, and Samsung Gear S exhibited the most accurate results. Test–retest reliability and validity of activity trackers depends on walking speed. In general, consumer activity trackers perform better at an average and vigorous walking speed than at a slower walking speed.

The survival of microencapsulated islet grafts is limited, even if capsular overgrowth is restricted to a small percentage of the capsules. In search of processes other than overgrowth contributing to graft failure, we have studied the islets in non-overgrown capsules at several time points after allotransplantation in the rat. All recipients of islet allografts became normoglycemic. Grafts were retrieved at 4 and 8 weeks after implantation and at 15.3 +/- 2.3 weeks postimplant, 2 weeks after the mean time period at which graft failure occurred. Overgrowth of capsules was complete within 4 weeks postimplant, and it was usually restricted to <10% of the capsules. During the first 4 weeks of implantation, 40% of the initial number of islets was lost. Thereafter, we observed a decrease in function rather than in numbers of islets, as illustrated by a decline in the ex vivo glucose-induced insulin response. At 4 and 8 weeks postimplant, beta-cell replication was 10-fold higher in encapsulated islets than in islets in the normal pancreas, but these high replication rates were insufficient to prevent a progressive increase in the percentage of nonviable tissue in the islets. Necrosis and not apoptosis proved to be the major cause of cell death in the islets. The necrosis mainly occurred in the center of the islets, which indicates insufficient nutrition as a major causative factor. Our study demonstrates that not only capsular overgrowth but also an imbalance between beta-cell birth and beta-cell death contributes to the failure of encapsulated islet grafts. Our observations indicate that we should focus on finding or creating a transplantation site that, more than the unmodified peritoneal cavity, permits for close contact between the blood and the encapsulated islet tissue.

Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet

Mobile and tablet apps, ubiquitous and pervasive computing, wearable computing and domotics for health.