Validity of a Global Positioning System-Based Algorithm and Consumer Wearables for Classifying Active Trips in Children and Adults.
Validity of a Global Positioning System-Based Algorithm and Consumer Wearables for Classifying Active Trips in Children and Adults.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1123/jmpb.2021-0019
复制
发表时间：
2021-12
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
目的：研究基于全球定位系统(GPS)和基于消费者的两种基于出行记录的方法对儿童和成人的步行、骑自行车和车辆出行进行分类的收敛有效性。参与者(N=34)连续多天佩戴Qstarz GPS跟踪器、Fitbit Alta和Garmin Vivosmart 3，并记录他们的户外行人、骑自行车和车辆旅行。记录的行程与使用基于个人活动位置测量系统(Palms)GPS的算法、Fitbit的SmartTrack和Garmin的Move IQ的设备测量的行程进行了比较。对行程和日级协议进行了测试。与日志相比，手掌识别并正确分类了75.6%、94.5%和96.9%的步行、骑行和车辆出行方式(占活跃出行的84.5%，F1=0.84和0.87)。Fitbit和Garmin识别并正确分类了26.8%和17.8%(占活跃出行的22.6%，F1=0.40和0.30)和46.3%和43.8%(占活跃出行的45.2%，F1=0.58和0.59)的模式。Garmin更容易出现假阳性(没有记录的假行程)。在出行模式中，Palms和Garmin与Logs的日水平一致性是有利的，尽管Palms的表现最好。Fitbit严重低估了每天的骑行次数。结果相似，但对儿童的有利程度略低于成年人。手掌在儿童和成人中表现出良好的收敛效度，准确率分别比Fitbit和Garmin(基于F1)高50%和27%。提出了基于经验的改进手掌行人分类的建议。由于消费类设备可以捕捉室内和室外的步行/跑步和骑自行车，它们不太适合进行基于旅行的研究。
To investigate the convergent validity of a global positioning system (GPS)-based and two consumer-based measures with trip logs for classifying pedestrian, cycling, and vehicle trips in children and adults. Participants (N = 34) wore a Qstarz GPS tracker, Fitbit Alta, and Garmin vivosmart 3 on multiple days and logged their outdoor pedestrian, cycling, and vehicle trips. Logged trips were compared with device-measured trips using the Personal Activity Location Measurement System (PALMS) GPS-based algorithms, Fitbit’s SmartTrack, and Garmin’s Move IQ. Trip- and day-level agreement were tested. The PALMS identified and correctly classified the mode of 75.6%, 94.5%, and 96.9% of pedestrian, cycling, and vehicle trips (84.5% of active trips, F1 = 0.84 and 0.87) as compared with the log. Fitbit and Garmin identified and correctly classified the mode of 26.8% and 17.8% (22.6% of active trips, F1 = 0.40 and 0.30) and 46.3% and 43.8% (45.2% of active trips, F1 = 0.58 and 0.59) of pedestrian and cycling trips. Garmin was more prone to false positives (false trips not logged). Day-level agreement for PALMS and Garmin versus logs was favorable across trip modes, though PALMS performed best. Fitbit significantly underestimated daily cycling. Results were similar but slightly less favorable for children than adults. The PALMS showed good convergent validity in children and adults and were about 50% and 27% more accurate than Fitbit and Garmin (based on F1). Empirically-based recommendations for improving PALMS’ pedestrian classification are provided. Since the consumer devices capture both indoor and outdoor walking/running and cycling, they are less appropriate for trip-based research.