Feasibility and Effectiveness of Using Wearable Activity Trackers in Youth: A Systematic Review

Abstract

BackgroundThe proliferation and popularity of wearable activity trackers (eg, Fitbit, Jawbone, Misfit) may present an opportunity to integrate such technology into physical activity interventions. While several systematic reviews have reported intervention effects of using wearable activity trackers on adults’ physical activity levels, none to date have focused specifically on children and adolescents.ObjectiveThe aim of this review was to examine the effectiveness of wearable activity trackers as a tool for increasing children’s and adolescents’ physical activity levels. We also examined the feasibility of using such technology in younger populations (age range 5-19 years).MethodsWe conducted a systematic search of 5 electronic databases, reference lists, and personal archives to identify articles published up until August 2016 that met the inclusion criteria. Articles were included if they (1) specifically examined the use of a wearable device within an intervention or a feasibility study; (2) included participants aged 5-19 years old; (3) had a measure of physical activity as an outcome variable for intervention studies; (4) reported process data concerning the feasibility of the device in feasibility studies; and (5) were published in English. Data were analyzed in August 2016.ResultsIn total, we identified and analyzed 5 studies (3 intervention, 2 feasibility). Intervention delivery ranged from 19 days to 3 months, with only 1 study using a randomized controlled trial design. Wearable activity trackers were typically combined with other intervention approaches such as goal setting and researcher feedback. While intervention effects were generally positive, the reported differences were largely nonsignificant. The feasibility studies indicated that monitor comfort and design and feedback features were important factors to children and adolescents.ConclusionsThere is a paucity of research concerning the effectiveness and feasibility of wearable activity trackers as a tool for increasing children’s and adolescents’ physical activity levels. While there are some preliminary data to suggest these devices may have the potential to increase activity levels through self-monitoring and goal setting in the short term, more research is needed to establish longer-term effects on behavior.

The Motivational Impact of Wearable Healthy Lifestyle Technologies: A Self-determination Perspective on Fitbits With Adolescents

“…Furthermore, following the 8-week period, significant increases in amotivation were observed. In contrast to previous literature suggesting that healthy lifestyle technologies can impact young people's motivation for physical activity, [24][25][26] data demonstrate that healthy lifestyle technologies may impact negatively on students' motivation for physical activity. In examining the relationship between the Fitbit and young people in further detail, data suggested that peer comparison was a key factor in undermining levels of competence, autonomy, and relatedness.…”

“…23 Young people (age [11][12] have also reported finding features of real-time feedback and competition from the commercial Fitbit motivating, 24 suggesting that promotion of self-monitoring and goal-setting behaviors can increase physical activity levels. 25,26 Yet the evidence base on the health-related impact of young people's (age [13][14] use of healthy lifestyle technologies is limited. 14,20,21 A recent systematic literature review on adolescents and young adults (age 12-25 years) identified only 2 empirical studies that measured the health-related effects of using nutritional or physical activity apps.…”

Comparing the Data Quality of GPS Devices and Smartphones for Assessing Relationships between Place, Mobility, and Health: A Field Study (Preprint)

“…Prior feasibility studies with GPS devices for location-tracking in health have surfaced similar issues in use of such devices [31,44]. Moreover, previous work shows that GPS devices typically only function outdoors, where they can connect with multiple satellites, and perform best in places away from dense buildings [10,11].…”

“…To date, a variety of pilot and feasibility studies have examined user acceptance of devices such as wearable activity trackers [9,10], dedicated GPS devices [11], and GPS-enabled smartphones [12,13]. While this research generally shows reasonable acceptance among varied user groups, there remain gaps in understanding the spatial accuracy of each of these devices -particularly those that are available on the consumer market and thus could facilitate population-level research.…”

Activity Trackers, Relational Affordances, and Device Ecologies of Fitness Technologies (Preprint)

“…This stream of research suggests that activity tracking devices, by offering mechanisms such as goals reinforcement, gamification, and possibilities for social competition generate greater awareness about one's activity, and motivate engagement in specific fitness-related activities and behaviors [5,8,9]. Several studies in the past three years [e.g., 6,7,10,11] have focused on how different groups of users perceive and interact with the affordances of activity tracking devices.…”