Journal article
Accuracy of a smartphone pedometer application according to different speeds and mobile phone locations in a laboratory context.
- Presset B Institute of Sport Sciences, University of Lausanne, Quartier UNIL-Centre, Bâtiment Synathlon, 1015, Lausanne, Switzerland.
- Laurenczy B Scientific IT Services, ETH Zürich, Weinbergstrasse 11, 8001, Zürich, Switzerland.
- Malatesta D Institute of Sport Sciences, University of Lausanne, Quartier UNIL-Centre, Bâtiment Synathlon, 1015, Lausanne, Switzerland.
- Barral J Institute of Sport Sciences, University of Lausanne, Quartier UNIL-Centre, Bâtiment Synathlon, 1015, Lausanne, Switzerland.
- 2019-01-22
Published in:
- Journal of exercise science and fitness. - 2018
English
Background
The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of a smartphone application and a mechanical pedometer for step counting at different walking speeds and mobile phone locations in a laboratory context.
Methods
Seventeen adults wore an iPphone6© with Runtastic Pedometer© application (RUN), at 3 different locations (belt, arm, jacket) and a pedometer (YAM) at the waist. They were asked to walk on an instrumented treadmill (reference) at various speeds (2, 4 and 6 km/h).
Results
RUN was more accurate than YAM at 2 km/h (p < 0.05) and at 4 km/h (p = 0.03). At 6 km/h the two devices were equally accurate. The precision of YAM increased with speed (p < 0.05), while for RUN, the results were not significant but showed a trend (p = 0.051). Surprisingly, YAM underestimates the number of step by 60.5% at 2 km/h. The best accurate step counting (0.7% mean error) was observed when RUN is attached to the arm and at the highest speed.
Conclusions
RUN pedometer application could be recommended mainly for walking sessions even for low walking speed. Moreover, our results confirm that the smartphone should be strapped close to the body to discriminate steps from noise by the accelerometers (particularly at low speed).
The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of a smartphone application and a mechanical pedometer for step counting at different walking speeds and mobile phone locations in a laboratory context.
Methods
Seventeen adults wore an iPphone6© with Runtastic Pedometer© application (RUN), at 3 different locations (belt, arm, jacket) and a pedometer (YAM) at the waist. They were asked to walk on an instrumented treadmill (reference) at various speeds (2, 4 and 6 km/h).
Results
RUN was more accurate than YAM at 2 km/h (p < 0.05) and at 4 km/h (p = 0.03). At 6 km/h the two devices were equally accurate. The precision of YAM increased with speed (p < 0.05), while for RUN, the results were not significant but showed a trend (p = 0.051). Surprisingly, YAM underestimates the number of step by 60.5% at 2 km/h. The best accurate step counting (0.7% mean error) was observed when RUN is attached to the arm and at the highest speed.
Conclusions
RUN pedometer application could be recommended mainly for walking sessions even for low walking speed. Moreover, our results confirm that the smartphone should be strapped close to the body to discriminate steps from noise by the accelerometers (particularly at low speed).
- Language
-
- English
- Open access status
- gold
- Identifiers
-
- DOI 10.1016/j.jesf.2018.05.001
- PMID 30662492
- Persistent URL
- https://sonar.rero.ch/global/documents/287004
Statistics
Document views: 7
File downloads: