You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Validity of smartphone pedometer applications
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13104-015-1705-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Krystn Orr, Holly S. Howe, Janine Omran, Kristina A. Smith, Tess M. Palmateer, Alvin E. Ma, Guy Faulkner |
| Abstract |
Given the widespread use of smartphone pedometer applications and the relatively limited number of published validity tests, this study examined the validity of three popular commercial smartphone pedometer applications (i.e., Accupedo, Moves, and Runtastic Pedometer). Convenience samples of males and females were recruited for laboratory tests [n = 11; mean: aged 24.18 years (±3.06)] and a free-living test [n = 18; mean: aged 28.78 years (±9.52)]. Five conditions were assessed: (a) 20-step test, (b) 40-step stair climbing, (c) treadmill walking and running at different speeds, (d) driving, and (e) 3-day free-living. The Yamax SW-200 pedometer and observed step counts were used as criterion measures. Analyses identified an unacceptable error percentage in all of the applications compared to the pedometer. Given the inaccuracy of these applications, caution is required in their promotion to the public for self-monitoring physical activity and in their use as tools for assessing physical activity in research trials. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 6 | 27% |
| Canada | 3 | 14% |
| Spain | 3 | 14% |
| Saint Lucia | 1 | 5% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 5% |
| France | 1 | 5% |
| United States | 1 | 5% |
| Singapore | 1 | 5% |
| India | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 3 | 14% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 50% |
| Scientists | 9 | 41% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 191 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 1% |
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 187 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 41 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 35 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 11% |
| Researcher | 17 | 9% |
| Other | 10 | 5% |
| Other | 29 | 15% |
| Unknown | 38 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 39 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 25 | 13% |
| Sports and Recreations | 20 | 10% |
| Psychology | 15 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 37 | 19% |
| Unknown | 46 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 45. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 June 2023.
All research outputs
#850,667
of 24,081,774 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#73
of 4,360 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,969
of 395,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#4
of 155 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,081,774 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,360 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 395,725 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 155 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.