ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 1151

Comparison of Methodologic Approaches to Maximize the Validity of Fitbit Device Data for Arthritis-Related Research Purposes

Jeffrey R. Curtis1, Shuo Yang1, Lang Chen1, Nada Elmagboul1, David T. Redden2, Amy S. Mudano1, Phillip J. Foster3, Filby Cooper1, Ted R. Mikuls4, Justin K Owensby1 and Kenneth Saag5, 1University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 2Department of Biostatistics, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 3Department of Medicine, Division of Immunology and Rheumatology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 4Internal Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, VA Nebraska-Western Iowa Health Care System and University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, 5UAB, Birmingham, AL

Meeting: 2018 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Keywords: Arthritis, data analysis and data collection

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Date: Monday, October 22, 2018

Title: Epidemiology and Public Health Poster II: Gout, Ankylosing Spondylitis, Osteoarthritis, Osteoporosis, Pain, and Function

Session Type: ACR Poster Session B

Session Time: 9:00AM-11:00AM

Background/Purpose: Health activity tracker devices (e.g. Fitbit) are increasingly used component of medical evaluation. However, the validity and suitability of the data from such devices for research is not clear, specifically, methods are lacking to ascertain whether patients are consistently wearing the device and if the data is complete. We compared various methodologic approaches to describe the completeness of data capture in the context of a pilot study of patients with inflammatory arthritis.

Methods: We evaluated active & passively collected data from a trial of patients with gout who had a recent flare. All patients were given a Fitbit Charge HR2. Fitbit data (step count, sleep, heart rate [HR]) was evaluated in 1-minute increments. Minute-level HR data was compared with a gold standard for ‘Complete Wear’ as composite of step count, sleep, and HR, with imputation to 60-minute increments. Imputation of wear was performed for shorter intervals (1, 15, 30-minutes). Definitions for Complete of wear at a person-day level were evaluated using various parameters (e.g. ≥1200 minutes, or ≥800 minutes for days without sleep data). Variability in step count data was decomposed as between-person; within-person, between-day; and within-person, within-day (including error) based upon comparing sums of squares to total variance.

Results: At time of evaluation, 36 people contributed 4,534 person-days of observation. A total of 60% of person-days were considered Complete data with sleep, 14% as Complete data without sleep, and 26% with Partial Data. On days with Complete wear with sleep (gold standard), 13% of person-minutes were misclassified if only minute-level HR data was used, and step count & sleep data were ignored, while 8% were misclassified if only HR data was used, with imputation. Adding sleep and step count data, 12% of person-minutes were misclassified if minute-level data without imputation was used; 6% of person-minutes were misclassified if imputation to 60-minutes was applied, but the 1200/800 minute thresholds for Complete wear over a day were not required.

Imputation at 60-minute intervals yielded similar results to imputation at 1, 15, and 30-minute increments. There were intervals as long as 3+ hours where patients were wearing the device (based on gold standard) yet had no HR data. Among Complete wear days, variance in the step count data was much more related to between-person variability (36%) rather than within-person, between-day variability (<1%). With imputation at 60-minute increments, wear patterns are shown in the heat map (Figure).

Conclusion: Fitbit and other health tracker data appear useful as part of arthritis research, but several methodologic issues must be considered to maximize validity and interpretation.

Figure: Heat Map – Data of Complete Wear with Sleep (>1200 minutes) [Black], Complete Wear without Sleep [Dark Gray], and Incomplete Wear [Light Gray]

 


Disclosure: J. R. Curtis, Amgen Inc., 2, 5,AbbVie Inc., 2, 5,BMS, 2, 5,Corrona, LLC, 2, 5,Janssen, 2, 5,Eli Lilly, 2, 5,Myriad, 2, 5,Pfizer, Inc., 2, 5,Roche/Genentech, 2, 5,Radius, 2, 5,UCB, Inc., 2, 5; S. Yang, None; L. Chen, None; N. Elmagboul, None; D. T. Redden, None; A. S. Mudano, None; P. J. Foster, None; F. Cooper, None; T. R. Mikuls, None; J. K. Owensby, None; K. Saag, Amgen Inc., 2, 5,Merck & Co., 2, 5,Lilly, 5,Radius, 5.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Curtis JR, Yang S, Chen L, Elmagboul N, Redden DT, Mudano AS, Foster PJ, Cooper F, Mikuls TR, Owensby JK, Saag K. Comparison of Methodologic Approaches to Maximize the Validity of Fitbit Device Data for Arthritis-Related Research Purposes [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2018; 70 (suppl 9). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/comparison-of-methodologic-approaches-to-maximize-the-validity-of-fitbit-device-data-for-arthritis-related-research-purposes/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to 2018 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/comparison-of-methodologic-approaches-to-maximize-the-validity-of-fitbit-device-data-for-arthritis-related-research-purposes/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology