Validity of Wearable Monitors and Smartphone Applications for Measuring Steps in Semi-Structured and Free-Living Settings

Wearable technologies have become powerful tools for health and fitness and are indispensable everyday tools for many individuals; however, significant limitations exist related to the validity of the metrics these monitors purport to measure. Thus, the purpose of the present study was to validate the step count of three wearable monitors (i.e., Yamax 3D Power-Walker, Garmin Vivofit 3 and Medisana Vifit), as well as two Android apps (i.e., Accupedo Pedometer and Pedometer 2.0), in a sample of healthy adults. These monitors and apps were evaluated in a lab-based semi-structured study and a 3-day field study under habitual free-living conditions. A convenience sample of 24 healthy adults (14 males and 10 females; 32.6 ± 2.5 years) participated in both studies. Direct step observation and Actigraph served as the criterion methods and validity was evaluated by comparing each monitor and app with the criterion measure using mean absolute percentage errors (MAPE), Bland–Altman plots, and Intraclass Correlation Coefficients. The results revealed high validity for the three wearable monitors during the semi-structured study, with MAPE values approximately 5% for Yamax and Vifit and well below 5% for Vivofit, while the two apps showed high MAPE values over 20%. In the free-living study all monitors and apps had high MAPE, over 10%. The lowest error was observed for Yamax, Vifit and Pedometer app, while Accupedo app had the highest error, overestimating steps by 32%. The present findings cannot support the value of wearable monitors and apps as acceptable measures of PA and step count in free-living contexts. Wearable monitors and apps that might be valid in one context, might not be valid in different contexts and vice versa, and researchers should be aware of this limitation.