Fig 1.
Observed variations between conducted experiments.
Table 1.
Demographic and clinical characteristics of the study participants.
Table 2.
Comparison of the mobility outcomes between the Qstarz GPS receiver and the different TicWatch models.
Fig 2.
Bland-Altman plots illustrating A) the difference in the time spent in sedentary activity between the ActiGraph and TicWatch S2 and, B) the difference in the time spent in non-sedentary activity between the ActiGraph and TicWatch S2 Dashed lines = 95% limits of agreement (1.96 SDs of the mean difference); darker dashed line = mean difference or bias.
Table 3.
Comparison of the time (min) spent in sedentary and non-sedentary (light, moderate/vigorous) behavior between the ActiGraph and TicWatch S2 during the real-life mobility protocol (N = 25).
Fig 3.
Bland-Altman plots illustrating the difference in the average counts per minute per 60-minute epoch length, between the ActiGraph and TicWatch S2 during the real-life mobility protocol activities reported by the participants.
Dashed lines = 95% limits of agreement (1.96 SDs of the mean difference); darker dashed lines mean difference or bias.
Fig 4.
Bland-Altman plots illustrating A) the difference between the self-reported step count and the TicWatch S2 (N = 21), and B) difference between the self-reported step count and TicWatch Pro 3 Ultra GPS (N = 10) during the step count task. Dashed lines = 95% limits of agreement (1.96 SDs of the mean difference); darker dashed line mean difference or bias.