Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Predicting lying, sitting, walking and running using Apple Watch and Fitbit data
  1. Daniel Fuller1,2,
  2. Javad Rahimipour Anaraki3,
  3. Bongai Simango1,
  4. Machel Rayner1,
  5. Faramarz Dorani2,
  6. Arastoo Bozorgi2,
  7. Hui Luan4,
  8. Fabien A Basset1
  1. 1School of Human Kinetics and Recreation, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada
  2. 2Department of Computer Science, Faculty of Science, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada
  3. 3Institute of Biomedical Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  4. 4Department of Geography, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon, USA
  1. Correspondence to Daniel Fuller; fuller.daniel{at}gmail.com

Abstract

Objectives This study’s objective was to examine whether commercial wearable devices could accurately predict lying, sitting and varying intensities of walking and running.

Methods We recruited a convenience sample of 49 participants (23 men and 26 women) to wear three devices, an Apple Watch Series 2, a Fitbit Charge HR2 and iPhone 6S. Participants completed a 65 min protocol consisting of 40 min of total treadmill time and 25 min of sitting or lying time. The study’s outcome variables were six movement types: lying, sitting, walking self-paced and walking/running at 3 metabolic equivalents of task (METs), 5 METs and 7 METs. All analyses were conducted at the minute level with heart rate, steps, distance and calories from Apple Watch and Fitbit. These included three different machine learning models: support vector machines, Random Forest and Rotation forest.

Results Our dataset included 3656 and 2608 min of Apple Watch and Fitbit data, respectively. Rotation Forest models had the highest classification accuracies for Apple Watch at 82.6%, and Random Forest models had the highest accuracy for Fitbit at 90.8%. Classification accuracies for Apple Watch data ranged from 72.6% for sitting to 89.0% for 7 METs. For Fitbit, accuracies varied between 86.2% for sitting to 92.6% for 7 METs.

Conclusion This preliminary study demonstrated that data from commercial wearable devices could predict movement types with reasonable accuracy. More research is needed, but these methods are a proof of concept for movement type classification at the population level using commercial wearable device data.

  • physical activity
  • exercise physiology
  • health promotion
  • exercises
  • measurement

Data availability statement

Data are available in a public, open access repository. Data are available at this link: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/ZS2Z2J.

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Data availability statement

Data are available in a public, open access repository. Data are available at this link: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/ZS2Z2J.

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Twitter @walkabilly

  • Contributors DF conceptualised the paper. All authors assisted with data collection. DF, JRA, BS, AB and HL conducted data analysis. All authors contributed to writing the manuscript and approved the submitted version.

  • Funding Funding for this research was provided by Dr. Fuller’s Canada Research Chair (# 950–2 30 773).

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.