2023, Volume 3 (Issue 1): 4 OPEN ACCESS Research Directs in Health Sciences The Validity of a Novel Low-Cost, Wearable Physical Activity Monitor in a Laboratory Setting Direct Original Research Andrew Newton 1 , Ellen Glickman 2 , Jacob E. Barkley 2 1 Jacksonville State University, Jacksonville, Alabama /USA 2 Kent State University, Kent, Ohio/USA Abstract Introduction: Wearable physical activity monitors are popular and may provide a more accurate data than subjective methods. The present study assessed the validity of a novel, low-cost wearable physical activity monitor (Movband 3) relative to established measures. Methods: Participants (N = 19) completed four treadmill stages (1.5, 3.0, 4.0, 6.0 MPH) while wearing the Movband 3 and the validated Actigraph GT1M monitor. Oxygen consumption (VO2 ml/kg/min) and heart rate (beats/min) were recorded. The relationship between Movband data and established measures was assessed via Pearson’s correlations. Tests of agreement were performed for actual and Movband miles traveled. Results: There were large, positive, significant (p < 0.001) effect sizes for the associations between Movband counts and Actigraph counts ( r = 0.72), VO2 (r = 0.59), and heart rate (r = 0.63). There was also a large, positive, significant (p < 0.001) association between actual and Movband miles ( r = 0.97). However, the difference (Δ) between Movband and actual miles was greater than a null hypothesis of zero (∆ = 0.77 ± 0.45 miles or 31.8%, t = 7.4, p < 0.001). Conclusion: While there was evidence to support the validity of the Movband 3 for the assessment of physical activity intensity this device did not provide an accurate measure of miles traveled. Key Words: Accelerometer, Exercise, Agreement. Corresponding author: ANDREW NEWTON, ATNEWTON@JSU.EDU Introduction Physical activity monitoring is prevalent in both research settings and for personal use 1 . Tools used for monitoring physical activity are commonly classified as subjective or objective 2-4 . Validated subjective measures such as questionnaires and logs are typically inexpensive options which have been effectively modified to fit different populations 3 . However, questionnaires are ultimately reliant on recall of participants, and are thus subject to bias 3 . Objective, laboratory-based assessments such as indirect calorimetry and doubly labeled water represent accurate assessments of physical activity/energy expenditure 2 . However, these assessments are expensive and require specialized training to administer making them impractical. Wearable activity monitors (e.g., accelerometers) are less expensive and easier to use than laboratory-based objective measures, yet often provide superior accuracy compared to subjective measures 5,6 . Because of their accuracy and ease of use activity monitors have become a popular objective method for assessing physical activity for both Published: April 7, 2023 Copyright, 2023 by the authors. Published by Pinnacle Science and the work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons .org/licenses/by/4.0/ Research Directs in Health Sciences: 2023, Volume 3 (Issue 1): 4 ISSN: 2768-492X Open Access