Wearable activity monitors—those handy devices you might wear on your wrist or elsewhere on your body—are increasingly common in health research. They can offer incredible insights into our daily physical activity and even our well-being - but how accurate are they, especially for specific patient populations? This is a crucial question for cancer researchers and clinicians.
Dr. Roberto Benzo, an Assistant Professor at the Ohio State University and the Director of the Lifestyle Lab, is tackling this head-on. He and his team recently published a paper in JMIR Research Protocols titled, "Comparing the Accuracy of Different Wearable Activity Monitors in Patients with Lung Cancer and Providing Initial Recommendations: Protocol for a Pilot Validation Study."
A Critical Look at Wearable Accuracy
While wearables are frequently used in cancer survivorship research, there's a significant gap: limited validation studies specifically for cancer populations. Patients with lung cancer, for instance, often face unique mobility challenges and gait impairments that could affect how accurately these devices track activity.
Dr. Benzo and his team have recognized this need. Their study involves developing a comprehensive protocol to rigorously test the accuracy of three popular wearable activity monitors: the Fitbit Charge 6 (a commercial wearable), the ActiGraph LEAP, and the activPAL3 micro (research-grade wearables). The goal is to determine how well these devices perform under both controlled laboratory conditions and in real-world, "free-living" environments among patients with lung cancer. Data collection for this study is ongoing, with the initial results expected towards the end of this year.
Why This Research Matters
The insights this research will generate are vital. They can help ensure that when clinicians and researchers use wearable data to monitor and support the health of adults with lung cancer, that data is reliable and accurate. This is crucial for interpreting clinical research findings and designing effective future interventions. The study also aims to provide comprehensive recommendations for how to conduct future validation studies of activity monitors, helping to lay the groundwork for standardizing these protocols, further incorporating wearables in oncology care, and ultimately improving health outcomes for adults with cancer.
The team chose JMIR Research Protocols because it's a leading journal in digital health known for publishing high-quality protocols that advance the field. Its broad readership and focus on innovation make it an ideal platform to share this validation protocol, which bridges behavioral science, oncology, and wearable technology.
Want to understand the intricate details of how these wearable devices are being put to the test? We encourage you to watch the video where Dr. Benzo outlines their groundbreaking work and read the full research article to explore the complete study protocol and its potential impact.
Subscribe Now