Journal Article

Open-Source, Step-Counting Algorithm for Smartphone Data Collected in Clinical and Nonclinical Settings: Algorithm Development and Validation Study

Straczkiewicz, Marcin, Thompson, Embree, Keating, Nancy L, Onnela, Jukka-Pekka, Matulonis, Ursula A, Campos, Susana M, Wright, Alexi A

2023

Overview

Step counts are increasingly used in public health and clinical research to assess well-being, lifestyle, and health status. However, estimating step counts using commercial activity trackers has several limitations, including a lack of reproducibility, generalizability, and scalability. Smartphones are a potentially promising alternative, but their step-counting algorithms require robust validation that accounts for temporal sensor body location, individual gait characteristics, and heterogeneous health states. Our goal was to evaluate an open-source, step-counting method for smartphones under various measurement conditions against step counts estimated from data collected simultaneously from different body locations (\"cross-body\" validation), manually ascertained ground truth (\"visually assessed\" validation), and step counts from a commercial activity tracker (Fitbit Charge 2) in patients with advanced cancer (\"commercial wearable\" validation). We used 8 independent data sets collected in controlled, semicontrolled, and free-living environments with different devices (primarily Android smartphones and wearable accelerometers) carried at typical body locations. A total of 5 data sets (n=103) were used for cross-body validation, 2 data sets (n=107) for visually assessed validation, and 1 data set (n=45) was used for commercial wearable validation. In each scenario, step counts were estimated using a previously published step-counting method for smartphones that uses raw subsecond-level accelerometer data. We calculated the mean bias and limits of agreement (LoA) between step count estimates and validation criteria using Bland-Altman analysis. In the cross-body validation data sets, participants performed 751.7 (SD 581.2) steps, and the mean bias was -7.2 (LoA -47.6, 33.3) steps, or -0.5%. In the visually assessed validation data sets, the ground truth step count was 367.4 (SD 359.4) steps, while the mean bias was -0.4 (LoA -75.2, 74.3) steps, or 0.1%. In the commercial wearable validation data set, Fitbit devices indicated mean step counts of 1931.2 (SD 2338.4), while the calculated bias was equal to -67.1 (LoA -603.8, 469.7) steps, or a difference of 3.4%. This study demonstrates that our open-source, step-counting method for smartphone data provides reliable step counts across sensor locations, measurement scenarios, and populations, including healthy adults and patients with cancer.

• Publisher: JMIR Publications
• Subject: Accelerometers / Algorithms / Biomarkers / Cancer / Datasets / Exercise / Gait / Health care / Original Paper / Public domain / Sensors / Smartphones / University buildings / Wavelet transforms