Validation of a Commercial Android Smartwatch as an Activity Monitoring Platform
Validation of a Commercial Android Smartwatch as an Activity Monitoring Platform
复制标题
DOI：
10.1109/jbhi.2017.2732678
复制
发表时间：
2018-07-01
影响因子：
7.7
通讯作者：
James, Christopher J.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Amor, James D.;James, Christopher J.
活动监测（AM）是用于评估人的身体活动的既定技术。随着智能手表技术的迅速崛起，该平台为使用AM设备提供了一个有趣的机会，该设备既能够监控活动，又能够与其他医疗保健系统无缝对接。然而，围绕智能手表作为监控设备的适用性存在问题。本文介绍了一个智能手表，ZGPAX S8，作为一个活动监视器使用的验证。两个实验：物理操作测试和共定位测试。在物理操作测试中，将三个S8与人类物理操作下的参考加速度计进行比较。在协同定位测试中，四名参与者将智能手表与参考设备一起使用三个小时，以评估加速度计数据和来自两个设备的数据处理结果。这些实验的结果表明，S8加速度计在物理操作测试中具有良好的相关性和一致性限度（r（2）类似于0.95，CR类似于2.5 m/s（2）），并且在分析来自协同定位实验的处理数据时具有出色的相关性和一致性限度（r（2）0.99，CR类似于0.23）。根据这些结果，S8被评估为适用于AM的器械。确定了S8中的一些特定限制，如数据范围限幅、时间漂移和采样率一致性，但一旦对数据进行算法处理，这些限制不会影响器械的适用性。
Activity monitoring (AM) is an established technique for the assessment of a person's physical activity. With the rapid rise of smartwatch technology, this platform presents an interesting opportunity to use a device for AM that has both the ability to monitor activity and also the ability to interface seamlessly with other healthcare systems. There are questions however around the suitability of smartwatches as monitoring devices. This paper presents a validation of one smartwatch, the ZGPAX S8, for use as an activity monitor. Two experiments are presented: a physical manipulation test and a co-location test. In the physical manipulation test, three S8s are compared to a reference accelerometer under human physical manipulation. In the co-location test, the smartwatch is used alongside a reference device for a period of three hours by four participants to assess both the accelerometer data and the results of processing on data from both devices. Findings from these experiments show that the S8 accelerometer has a good correlation and limits of agreement in the physical manipulation test (r(2) similar to 0.95, CR similar to 2.5 m/s(2)), and excellent correlation and limits of agreement in the analysis of processed data from the co-location experiment (r(2) 0.99, CR similar to 0.23). From these results, the S8 is evaluated to be a suitable device for AM. Some specific limitations in the S8 are identified such as data range clipping, time drift and sample rate consistency, but these are not found to impact on the suitability of the device once algorithmic processing is applied to the data.