Children and adolescents do not meet the current recommendations on physical activity (PA), and as such, the health-related benefits of regular PA are not achieved. Nowadays, technology-based programs represent an appealing and promising option for children and adolescents to promote PA. The aim of this review was to systematically evaluate the effects of mobile health (mHealth) and wearable activity trackers on PA-related outcomes in this target group. Electronic databases such as the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science were searched to retrieve English language articles published in peer-reviewed journals from January 2012 to June 2018. Those included were articles that contained descriptions of interventions designed to increase PA among children (aged 6 to 12 years) only, or adolescents (aged 13 to 18 years) only, or articles that include both populations, and also, articles that measured at least 1 PA-related cognitive, psychosocial, or behavioral outcome. The interventions had to be based on mHealth tools (mobile phones, smartphones, tablets, or mobile apps) or wearable activity trackers. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs, cohort studies, before-and-after studies, and cross-sectional studies were considered, but only controlled studies with a PA comparison between groups were assessed for methodological quality. In total, 857 articles were identified. Finally, 7 studies (5 with tools of mHealth and 2 with wearable activity trackers) met the inclusion criteria. All studies with tools of mHealth used an RCT design, and 3 were of high methodological quality. Intervention delivery ranged from 4 weeks to 12 months, whereby mainly smartphone apps were used as a tool. Intervention delivery in studies with wearable activity trackers covered a period from 22 sessions during school recess and 8 weeks. Trackers were used as an intervention and evaluation tool. No evidence was found for the effect of mHealth tools, respectively wearable activity trackers, on PA-related outcomes. Given the small number of studies, poor compliance with accelerometers as a measuring instrument for PA, risk of bias, missing RCTs in relation to wearable activity trackers, and the heterogeneity of intervention programs, caution is warranted regarding the comparability of the studies and their effects. There is a clear need for future studies to develop PA interventions grounded on intervention mapping with a high methodological study design for specific target groups to achieve meaningful evidence.

The standard Plug-in-Gait (PiG) protocol used in three-dimensional gait analysis is prone to errors arising from inconsistent anatomical landmark identification and knee axis malalignment. The purpose of this study was to estimate the reliability and accuracy of a custom made lower body protocol (MA) compared with the PiG protocol. Twenty-fve subjects volunteered to evaluate the intertrial reliability. In addition, intersession reliability was examined in 10 participants. An indirect indicator of accuracy according to the knee varus/valgus and flexion/extension range of motion (ROM) was used. Regarding frontal plane knee angles and moments as well as transverse plane motions in the knee and hip joint, the intersession errors were lower for the MA compared with the standard approach. In reference to the knee joint angle cross-talk, the MA produced 4.7° more knee flexion/extension ROM and resulted in 6.5° less knee varus/valgus ROM in the frontal plane. Therefore, the MA tested in this study produced a more accurate and reliable knee joint axis compared with the PiG protocol. These results are especially important for measuring frontal and transverse plane gait parameters.