Validity of Daily Physical Activity Measurements of Fitbit Charge 2

Physical activity monitors collect continuous data to provide a summary of daily activity. The Fitbit Charge 2 monitors heart rate as well as steps, calories, and active minutes throughout the day. There is currently no research validating the Fitbit Charge 2 at measuring daily physical activity levels in a real life setting. PURPOSE: To compare measures of daily steps and active minutes of Fitbit Charge 2 with a research-grade accelerometer. METHODS: Sixteen active college students (Mean±SD; 23±4.9yrs; 16.43±10.19%fat; 9 male) consented to be part of the study. Participants wore an ActiGraph GT3X accelerometer and Fitbit Charge 2 concurrently for seven consecutive days. Both devices were programed with each participant’s information and the participants were instructed to perform their daily activities wearing both devices and only remove them to shower and to sleep. Data were considered valid when participants wore both devices for at least 10 hours on 4 or more days of the week. Steps and active minutes (moderate-vigorous physical activity) were recorded by each device. Mean bias was calculated by subtracting ActiGraph steps and active minutes from those obtained from the Fitbit Charge 2 for each day and an average daily mean bias was calculated using values from all seven days. Absolute percentage error was also calculated [100(|Fitbit Charge 2 - ActiGraph|)/ActiGraph] to indicate the overall 7-day difference between the Fitbit Charge 2 and ActiGraph. Pearson correlations and paired sample t-test were performed to compare Fitbit Charge 2 measurements with the corresponding ActiGraph measurements with significance considered at p\u3c0.05. RESULTS: The Fitbit Charge 2 overestimated steps by 2,451.3±2085.4 compared to the ActiGraph using the daily average steps over the seven days. This was 32.2±40.7% above the ActiGraph measurement. Average mean bias for daily active minutes was -52.1±58.9 with the Fitbit Charge 2 underestimating compared to the ActiGraph. Active minutes for the Fitbit Charge 2 were an average of 69±26.1% away from the ActiGraph. Steps for the Fitbit Charge 2 were significantly correlated to ActiGraph steps (r=0.575, p=0.02) while active minutes were not significantly correlated (r= -0.255, p=0.34). Paired sample t-test results showed a significant difference between the Fitbit Charge 2 steps and active minutes compared with the ActiGraph (p\u3c0.01 for both). CONCLUSION: The Fitbit Charge 2 may be useful for measuring steps in a free-living environment, however active minutes are significantly underestimated

Accuracy of Fitbit Charge 2 at Estimating VO2max, Calories, and Steps on a Treadmill

Current fitness activity trackers can account for steps, calories burned, heart rate, and distance traveled. A new feature has recently been introduced on the Fitbit Charge 2, “Cardio Fitness Level,” which is comparable to a VO2max score in that it allows consumers to be aware of their aerobic fitness level. PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy of the Fitbit Charge 2 at estimating VO2 score (“Cardio Fitness Level”), calories, and steps when compared to indirect calorimetry and video analyzed steps, respectively. METHODS: Twenty-two healthy adults (Mean±SD; 24.1±4.2yrs; 16.9±9.0%fat; 15 male) completed two separate visits. On the first visit, anthropometric measurements were taken followed by a 10-minute outdoor run. Participants ran for 10 minutes at their own pace on flat terrain as recommended by Fitbit to generate a Cardio Fitness score. On the second visit, participants came fasted, at least 8 hours, and completed a standardized VO2max protocol (Arizona State protocol) using a PARVO TrueOne2400 metabolic cart. The treadmill was set at 3mph for the first 3 minutes with 0% grade. Following the first stage, the speed was raised to the participant’s pre-selected speed (between 5-8mph) with 0% grade. After stage 2 the grade increased every minute by 1.5% and speed was kept constant until fatigue was reached. Calories and step counts from the Fitbits were correlated with the metabolic cart and tally counter respectively, using 2-tailed Pearson correlations. Significance was set at pRESULTS: Participants completed the VO2max test in an average of 11:05. Eight of the 22 estimated VO2max ranges given by Fitbit included the value given by the metabolic cart. Fitbit ranges for seven participants were below the metabolic cart values and the Fitbit ranges for the remaining seven participants were above the metabolic cart values. Calories were correlated between the Fitbit and metabolic cart (r = 0.874, pCONCLUSION: VO2 scores given by the Fitbit Charge 2 did not always match values given by the metabolic cart but may serve as a rough estimate of fitness level. Fitbit Charge 2 may also be useful in tracking calories and steps in a controlled setting, but results may differ in real world conditions

Simulations of Resistivity Recovery curves of electron-irradiated dilute FeCr alloys using an Object Kinetic Monte Carlo Model.

An Object Kinetic Monte Carlo model is being developed for dilute (less than 1% Cr) FeCr alloys. The model includes the effects of Cr on the mobility of radiation effects using information obtained either from density functional theory or effects of Cr on the mobility of radiation effects, using information obtained either from density functional theory or molecular dynamics calculations. The results are compared to experimental measurements of electric resistivity for different Cr concentrations. We analyse the dependence of Cr on the first two observed peaks: ID2 and IE and the influence of parameters such as the interaction radius between Cr and an Fe self-interstiti

Accuracy of Fitbit Activity Trackers During Walking in a Controlled Setting

Activity trackers are widely used to measure daily physical activity. Many devices have been shown to measure steps more accurately at higher intensities, however, it is also important to determine the accuracy of these new devices at measuring steps while walking at a pace similar to that used during most daily activities. PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy of 6 popular activity trackers at measuring steps while walking on a treadmill. METHODS: Twenty-six college students (Mean±SD; 22.1±3.7yrs; 25.1±4.0kg/m2; 13 male) walked 500 steps at 3mph on a treadmill while wearing 6 different activity trackers (Pedometer, Fitbit Blaze, Charge HR, Alta, Flex, Zip, One). The Charge HR was placed two fingers above the right wrist while the Flex was next to the wrist bone. The Blaze was placed two fingers above the left wrist while the Alta was next to the wrist bone. The Fitbit Zip and the One were aligned with the hipbone on the left and right waistband respectively. Steps were counted by a trained researcher using a hand tally counter. Missing values were replaced with the mean value for that device. Step counts were correlated between Fitbit devices and the pedometer and tally counter using Pearson correlations. Significance was set at p\u3c0.05. Mean bias scores were calculated between the step counts for each device and the tally counter. Mean Absolute Percent Error (MAPE) values were also calculated for each device relative to the tally counter. RESULTS: Fitbit Zip and One were significantly correlated with the tally counter (r=0.50, p\u3c0.05; r=0.68, p\u3c0.01, respectively) while the other devices were not significantly correlated. Mean bias and MAPE values were as follows: Device (Mean Bias/MAPE) Pedometer (-0.2±39.2/3.8±6.8), Blaze (34.5±67.1/9.9±11.3), Charge HR (-12.6±61.5/7.0±10.3), Alta (-85.0±70.8/17.1±14.1), Flex (49.5±242.4/19.7±45.3), Zip (1.8±3.4/0.4±0.6), One (0.2±2.1/0.3±0.3). Fitbit Zip and One were within one half percent of actual steps while wrist-worn Fitbits ranged from 7.0-19.7% from actual step counts. CONCLUSION: Consistent with previous research, activity trackers worn at the waist provide the most accurate step counts compared to wrist-worn models. Differences found in wrist-worn models may result in significant over- or underestimation of activity levels when worn for long periods of time

Comparison of Smartphone Pedometer Apps on a Treadmill versus Outdoors

Previous research has focused on the accuracy of smartphone pedometer apps in laboratory settings, however less information is available in outdoor (free living) environments. PURPOSE: Determine the accuracy of 5 smartphone apps at recording steps at a walking speed in a laboratory versus an outdoor setting. METHODS: Twenty-three healthy college students consented (Mean±SD; 22±3.8yrs; BMI 24.9±4.13kg/m2) to participate in 2 separate visits. During the first visit participants walked 500 steps at 3mph on a treadmill while wearing a pedometer and a smartphone placed in the pocket using 5 pedometer apps concurrently (Moves, Google Fit (G-Fit), Runtastic, Accupedo, S-Health). During the second visit, participants walked 400 meters at 3mph on a sidewalk outside. Actual steps for each visit were recorded using a hand tally counter device. Zero and negative values were replaced with the mean value for that trial. Statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS 23.0. Mean bias scores were calculated between the step count for each app and the respective tally count for each trial. Mean bias scores were correlated between trials for each app using Pearson correlations and significance was set at p\u3c0.05. Mean Absolute Percent Error (MAPE) values were also calculated for each app for both trials. RESULTS: G-Fit recorded 2 zero values and 2 negative values and Moves recorded 1 zero value. Mean bias scores were significantly correlated between the indoor and outdoor protocols for the pedometer (r=0.67, p\u3c0.01) and S-Health (r=0.46, p\u3c0.5). The remaining apps were not correlated between protocols. The outdoor protocol producing a greater mean bias for the outdoor protocol for G-Fit, Runtastic, and Accupedo (mean bias ± SD indoor, outdoor; -4.3±53.1, -19.3±120.0; -10.7±63.3, -33.4±118.7; 16.0±143.6, 79.0±75.0; respectively) and a greater mean bias for the indoor protocol for the pedometer, Moves, and S-Health (mean bias indoor, outdoor; -1.4±41.5, 0.0±34.1; -117.4±196.7, -42.2±209.6; 11.3±28.4, 0.0±58.7; respectively). MAPE was below 5% for the pedometer and S-Health for both trials. CONCLUSION: Apps with the lowest error in a controlled setting may be less affected when used in other settings, while apps with greater variation in a controlled setting may be affected when used in a different environment

Resistivity Recovery curves of electron-irradiated FeCr alloys with Object Kinetic Monte Carlo: influence of Cr interctions.

An Object Kinetic Monte Carlo model is being developed for dilute (less than 1% Cr) FeCr alloys. The model includes the effects of Cr on the mobility of radiation effects, using information obtained either from density functional theory or molecular dynamics calculations. The results are compared to experimental measurements of electric resistivity for different Cr concentrations. We analyse the dependence of Cr on the first two observed peaks: ID2 and IE and the influence of parameters such as the interaction radius between Cr and an Fe self-interstitial

Dystrophinopathy Phenotypes and Modifying Factors in Exon 45-55 Deletion

Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) exon 45-55 deletion (del45-55) has been postulated as a model that could treat up to 60% of DMD patients, but the associated clinical variability and complications require clarification. We aimed to understand the phenotypes and potential modifying factors of this dystrophinopathy subset. This cross-sectional, multicenter cohort study applied clinical and functional evaluation. Next generation sequencing was employed to identify intronic breakpoints and their impact on the Dp140 promotor, intronic long noncoding RNA, and regulatory splicing sequences. DMD modifiers (SPP1, LTBP4, ACTN3) and concomitant mutations were also assessed. Haplotypes were built using DMD single nucleotide polymorphisms. Dystrophin expression was evaluated via immunostaining, Western blotting, reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and droplet digital PCR in 9 muscle biopsies. The series comprised 57 subjects (23 index) expressing Becker phenotype (28%), isolated cardiopathy (19%), and asymptomatic features (53%). Cognitive impairment occurred in 90% of children. Patients were classified according to 10 distinct index-case breakpoints; 4 of them were recurrent due to founder events. A specific breakpoint (D5) was associated with severity, but no significant effect was appreciated due to the changes in intronic sequences. All biopsies showed dystrophin expression of >67% and traces of alternative del45-57 transcript that were not deemed pathogenically relevant. Only the LTBP4 haplotype appeared associated the presence of cardiopathy among the explored extragenic factors. We confirmed that del45-55 segregates a high proportion of benign phenotypes, severe cases, and isolated cardiac and cognitive presentations. Although some influence of the intronic breakpoint position and the LTBP4 modifier may exist, the pathomechanisms responsible for the phenotypic variability remain largely unresolved. ANN NEUROL 2022;92:793-80

Minimal information for studies of extracellular vesicles 2018 (MISEV2018): a position statement of the International Society for Extracellular Vesicles and update of the MISEV2014 guidelines

The last decade has seen a sharp increase in the number of scientific publications describing physiological and pathological functions of extracellular vesicles (EVs), a collective term covering various subtypes of cell-released, membranous structures, called exosomes, microvesicles, microparticles, ectosomes, oncosomes, apoptotic bodies, and many other names. However, specific issues arise when working with these entities, whose size and amount often make them difficult to obtain as relatively pure preparations, and to characterize properly. The International Society for Extracellular Vesicles (ISEV) proposed Minimal Information for Studies of Extracellular Vesicles (“MISEV”) guidelines for the field in 2014. We now update these “MISEV2014” guidelines based on evolution of the collective knowledge in the last four years. An important point to consider is that ascribing a specific function to EVs in general, or to subtypes of EVs, requires reporting of specific information beyond mere description of function in a crude, potentially contaminated, and heterogeneous preparation. For example, claims that exosomes are endowed with exquisite and specific activities remain difficult to support experimentally, given our still limited knowledge of their specific molecular machineries of biogenesis and release, as compared with other biophysically similar EVs. The MISEV2018 guidelines include tables and outlines of suggested protocols and steps to follow to document specific EV-associated functional activities. Finally, a checklist is provided with summaries of key points