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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vorlíček, Michal, Stewart, Tom, Schipperijn, Jasper, Burian, Jaroslav, Rubín, Lukáš, Dygrýn, Jan, Mitáš, Josef, Duncan, Scott
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