Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39532924›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Accuracy and reliability of accelerometer-based pedometers in step counts during walking, running, and stair climbing in different locations of attachment.

Jiahao Pan, Shutao Wei

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jiahao PanBiomedical Engineering Doctoral Program, Boise State University, Boise, 83706, USA.
Shutao WeiDepartment of Physical Education, Xiamen University of Technology, Xiamen, 361000, China. st.wei@361sport.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the accuracy and reliability of accelerometer-based pedometers placed on the wrist, waist, and shoe's midsole during walking, running, and stair climbing. Twenty healthy adults were recruited. Steps were recorded by the pedometers and visually assessed from simultaneously recorded video to evaluate the accuracy of each pedometer in different locations of attachment. One week later, steps were recorded again by the pedometers only to evaluate the reliability of each pedometer in different locations of attachment. The wrist-worn pedometer presented significantly greater error scores compared to the midsole-worn pedometer during walking (p < 0.001), running (p = 0.006), and stair climbing (p = 0.003). Additionally, mean absolute precent error and Bland-Altman plots indicated that the pedometer worn in the midsole was most accurate for running and stair climbing, followed by waist-worn and wrist-worn pedometers. Furthermore, the midsole-worn and waist-worn pedometers showed strong reliability during walking and running, but only the midsole-worn pedometer presented acceptable reliability during stair climbing. The pedometer's position impacts the accuracy and reliability of step counts, especially for walking and stair climbing. Embedding the pedometer into the midsole seems an effective approach to improve the accuracy and reliability of step counts.

Indexed as

AccelerometryRunningStair ClimbingWalkingAdultFemaleHumansMaleReproducibility of ResultsYoung AdultExercise medicineExercise trackPhysical activityStep-countingWearing positions

Identifiers

PMID39532924
PMCPMC11557569

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.