Accuracy and Precision of Energy Expenditure, Heart Rate, and Steps Measured by Combined-Sensing Fitbits Against Reference Measures: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Guillaume Chevance, Natalie M Golaszewski, Elizabeth Tipton, Eric B Hekler, Matthew Buman, Gregory J Welk, Kevin Patrick, Job G Godino

Journal: JMIR mHealth and uHealth 2022;10(4):e35626

PMID: 35416777

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Although it is widely recognized that physical activity is an important determinant of health, assessing this complex behavior is a considerable challenge.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to examine, quantify, and report the current state of evidence for the validity of energy expenditure, heart rate, and steps measured by recent combined-sensing Fitbits.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and Bland-Altman meta-analysis of validation studies of combined-sensing Fitbits against reference measures of energy expenditure, heart rate, and steps.

RESULTS

A total of 52 studies were included in the systematic review. Among the 52 studies, 41 (79%) were included in the meta-analysis, representing 203 individual comparisons between Fitbit devices and a criterion measure (ie, n=117, 57.6% for heart rate; n=49, 24.1% for energy expenditure; and n=37, 18.2% for steps). Overall, most authors of the included studies concluded that recent Fitbit models underestimate heart rate, energy expenditure, and steps compared with criterion measures. These independent conclusions aligned with the results of the pooled meta-analyses showing an average underestimation of -2.99 beats per minute (k comparison=74), -2.77 kcal per minute (k comparison=29), and -3.11 steps per minute (k comparison=19), respectively, of the Fitbit compared with the criterion measure (results obtained after removing the high risk of bias studies; population limit of agreements for heart rate, energy expenditure, and steps: -23.99 to 18.01, -12.75 to 7.41, and -13.07 to 6.86, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Fitbit devices are likely to underestimate heart rate, energy expenditure, and steps. The estimation of these measurements varied by the quality of the study, age of the participants, type of activities, and the model of Fitbit. The qualitative conclusions of most studies aligned with the results of the meta-analysis. Although the expected level of accuracy might vary from one context to another, this underestimation can be acceptable, on average, for steps and heart rate. However, the measurement of energy expenditure may be inaccurate for some research purposes.

©Guillaume Chevance, Natalie M Golaszewski, Elizabeth Tipton, Eric B Hekler, Matthew Buman, Gregory J Welk, Kevin Patrick, Job G Godino. Originally published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth (https://mhealth.jmir.org), 13.04.2022.

Address: Barcelona Institute for Global Health, ISGlobal, Barcelona, Spain.; Herbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Longevity Science, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States.; Center for Wireless & Population Health Systems, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States.; Department of Statistics, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, United States.; Exercise and Physical Activity Resource Center, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States.; School of Nutrition & Health Promotion, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ, United States.; Department of Kinesiology, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United States.; Laura Rodriguez Research Institute, Family Health Centers of San Diego, San Diego, CA, United States.
Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.