Reliability of Zephyr Bioharness and Fitbit Charge Measures of Heart Rate and Activity at Rest, During the Modified Canadian Aerobic Fitness Test, and Recovery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nazari, G, MacDermid, JC, Sinden, KE, Richardson, J, and Tang, A. Reliability of Zephyr Bioharness and Fitbit Charge measures of heart rate and activity at rest, during the modified Canadian Aerobic Fitness Test, and recovery. J Strength Cond Res 33(2): 559-571, 2019-The purpose of this study was to determine the intrasession and intersession reliability of Zephyr Bioharness (ZB) and Fitbit Charge variables in both healthy men and women at rest, during the Modified Canadian Aerobic Fitness Test (mCAFT), and throughout recovery. Stratified convenience and snowball sampling were used to recruit 60 participants (30 women, 48 ± 15 years) and (30 men, 48 ± 15 years) from McMaster University student, staff, and faculty population. At rest, intrasession average heart rate (b·min). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Standard Error of Measurement [SEM] for Zephyr ranged from (0.94-0.97) [1.17-1.70] to (0.92-0.97) [1.45-2.10] for Fitbit Charge. During the mCAFT, the Zephyr ICCs and (SEM) ranged from 0.31-0.99 (1.28-8.10) to 0.45-0.99 (1.45-8.71) for the Fitbit Charge. Throughout the recovery, the ICCs and (SEM) ranged from 0.44-0.98 (1.26-10.47) to 0.45-0.98 (1.15-11.90) for Zephyr and Fitbit devices, respectively. At rest, intersession ICCs (SEM) for Zephyr and Fitbit ranged from 0.90-0.94 (1.73-2.37) to 0.88-0.94 (1.83-2.67), respectively. At mCAFT, the Zephyr ICCs (SEM) ranged from 0.91-0.97 (3.12-4.64) to 0.85-0.98 (3.28-4.88) for the Fitbit. Throughout the recovery, the ICCs (SEM) ranged from 0.93-0.97 (2.65-4.66) to 0.76-0.91 (3.17-4.67) for Zephyr and Fitbit devices, respectively. To conclude, both the ZB and Fitbit Charge devices demonstrated excellent reliability measures throughout the 3 phases. The findings from our study add to the existing pool of literature regarding the reliability parameters of wearable devices and suggest that stable and consistent measures of heart rate and physical activity can be obtained using ZB and Fitbit Charge devices among healthy male and female participants at rest, during a standardized submaximal fitness test (mCAFT), and throughout recovery.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".