ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Sensor-Based Frailty Assessment Using Fitbit.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-Time Foot Height Estimation and Activity Classification Using a Foot-Mounted IMU Implemented on a Smartphone.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Using Indoor Movement Complexity in Smart Homes to Detect Frailty in Older Adults: Multiple-Methods Case Series Study.JMIR aging · 2026Article
- Tracking the longitudinal course of physiologic and mental health functioning among individuals in substance use disorder treatment.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- A novel sensor-based real-time tracking game for assessing ankle proprioceptive effects on sensorimotor performance.Biomedical engineering online · 2025Article
- Development of Non-Invasive Continuous Glucose Prediction Models Using Multi-Modal Wearable Sensors in Free-Living Conditions.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study evaluated the reliability of Fitbit in assessing frailty based on motor and heart rate (HR) parameters through a validated upper extremity function (UEF) test, which involves 20 s of rapid elbow flexion. For motor performance, participants completed six trials of full elbow flexion using their right arm, with and without weight. Fitbit and a commercial motion sensor were worn on the right arm. For HR measurements, an ECG system was placed on the left chest alongside the Fitbit on the left wrist. Motor parameters assessing speed, flexibility, weakness, exhaustion, and HR before, during, and after UEF were measured. A total of 42 participants (age = 22 ± 3) were recruited. For motor parameters, excellent agreement was observed between the wearable sensor and Fitbit, except for flexibility (ICC = 0.87 ± 0.09). For HR parameters, ICC values showed weak agreement between ECG and Fitbit for HR increase and recovery (ICC = 0.24 ± 0.11), while moderate to stronger agreement was seen for mean HR during baseline, task, and post-task (ICC = 0.81 ± 0.13). Fitbit is a reliable tool for assessing frailty through motor parameters and provides reasonably accurate HR estimates during baseline, task, and recovery periods. However, Fitbit's ability to track rapid HR changes during activity is limited.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.