Cargando…
Smart Watch Versus Classic Receivers: Static Validity of Three GPS Devices in Different Types of Built Environments
In order to study the relationship between human physical activity and the design of the built environment, it is important to measure the location of human movement accurately. In this study, we compared an inexpensive GPS receiver (Holux RCV-3000) and a frequently used Garmin Forerunner 35 smart w...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8588079/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34770539 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21217232 |
_version_ | 1784598348304482304 |
---|---|
author | Vorlíček, Michal Stewart, Tom Schipperijn, Jasper Burian, Jaroslav Rubín, Lukáš Dygrýn, Jan Mitáš, Josef Duncan, Scott |
author_facet | Vorlíček, Michal Stewart, Tom Schipperijn, Jasper Burian, Jaroslav Rubín, Lukáš Dygrýn, Jan Mitáš, Josef Duncan, Scott |
author_sort | Vorlíček, Michal |
collection | PubMed |
description | In order to study the relationship between human physical activity and the design of the built environment, it is important to measure the location of human movement accurately. In this study, we compared an inexpensive GPS receiver (Holux RCV-3000) and a frequently used Garmin Forerunner 35 smart watch, with a device that has been validated and recommended for physical activity research (Qstarz BT-Q1000XT). These instruments were placed on six geodetic points, which represented a range of different environments (e.g., residential, open space, park). The coordinates recorded by each device were compared with the known coordinates of the geodetic points. There were no differences in accuracy among the three devices when averaged across the six sites. However, the Garmin was more accurate in the city center and the Holux was more accurate in the park and housing estate areas compared to the other devices. We consider the location accuracy of the Holux and the Garmin to be comparable to that of the Qstarz. Therefore, we consider these devices to be suitable instruments for locating physical activity. Researchers must also consider other differences among these devices (such as battery life) when determining if they are suitable for their research studies. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8588079 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-85880792021-11-13 Smart Watch Versus Classic Receivers: Static Validity of Three GPS Devices in Different Types of Built Environments Vorlíček, Michal Stewart, Tom Schipperijn, Jasper Burian, Jaroslav Rubín, Lukáš Dygrýn, Jan Mitáš, Josef Duncan, Scott Sensors (Basel) Article In order to study the relationship between human physical activity and the design of the built environment, it is important to measure the location of human movement accurately. In this study, we compared an inexpensive GPS receiver (Holux RCV-3000) and a frequently used Garmin Forerunner 35 smart watch, with a device that has been validated and recommended for physical activity research (Qstarz BT-Q1000XT). These instruments were placed on six geodetic points, which represented a range of different environments (e.g., residential, open space, park). The coordinates recorded by each device were compared with the known coordinates of the geodetic points. There were no differences in accuracy among the three devices when averaged across the six sites. However, the Garmin was more accurate in the city center and the Holux was more accurate in the park and housing estate areas compared to the other devices. We consider the location accuracy of the Holux and the Garmin to be comparable to that of the Qstarz. Therefore, we consider these devices to be suitable instruments for locating physical activity. Researchers must also consider other differences among these devices (such as battery life) when determining if they are suitable for their research studies. MDPI 2021-10-30 /pmc/articles/PMC8588079/ /pubmed/34770539 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21217232 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Vorlíček, Michal Stewart, Tom Schipperijn, Jasper Burian, Jaroslav Rubín, Lukáš Dygrýn, Jan Mitáš, Josef Duncan, Scott Smart Watch Versus Classic Receivers: Static Validity of Three GPS Devices in Different Types of Built Environments |
title | Smart Watch Versus Classic Receivers: Static Validity of Three GPS Devices in Different Types of Built Environments |
title_full | Smart Watch Versus Classic Receivers: Static Validity of Three GPS Devices in Different Types of Built Environments |
title_fullStr | Smart Watch Versus Classic Receivers: Static Validity of Three GPS Devices in Different Types of Built Environments |
title_full_unstemmed | Smart Watch Versus Classic Receivers: Static Validity of Three GPS Devices in Different Types of Built Environments |
title_short | Smart Watch Versus Classic Receivers: Static Validity of Three GPS Devices in Different Types of Built Environments |
title_sort | smart watch versus classic receivers: static validity of three gps devices in different types of built environments |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8588079/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34770539 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21217232 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vorlicekmichal smartwatchversusclassicreceiversstaticvalidityofthreegpsdevicesindifferenttypesofbuiltenvironments AT stewarttom smartwatchversusclassicreceiversstaticvalidityofthreegpsdevicesindifferenttypesofbuiltenvironments AT schipperijnjasper smartwatchversusclassicreceiversstaticvalidityofthreegpsdevicesindifferenttypesofbuiltenvironments AT burianjaroslav smartwatchversusclassicreceiversstaticvalidityofthreegpsdevicesindifferenttypesofbuiltenvironments AT rubinlukas smartwatchversusclassicreceiversstaticvalidityofthreegpsdevicesindifferenttypesofbuiltenvironments AT dygrynjan smartwatchversusclassicreceiversstaticvalidityofthreegpsdevicesindifferenttypesofbuiltenvironments AT mitasjosef smartwatchversusclassicreceiversstaticvalidityofthreegpsdevicesindifferenttypesofbuiltenvironments AT duncanscott smartwatchversusclassicreceiversstaticvalidityofthreegpsdevicesindifferenttypesofbuiltenvironments |