Runtastic PRO app: an excellent all-rounder for logging fitness

Antón, Antonio Monroy; Rodríguez, Bárbara Rodríguez

doi:10.1136/bjsports-2015-094940

Cited by 16 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…9 However, because none of these was compared against direct visualization, it could be why most studies have reported overestimation rather than underestimation of steps walked and distance covered. The Runtastic has been reported to be an accurate approach to tracking PA. 10 However, our findings suggest that Runtastic grossly underestimates the steps walked and distance covered, similar to previous studies. 3,4 Therefore, better accuracy in measuring both steps taken, and distance covered for both the Fitbit and Runtastic, is required if they are to be used in PA research.…”

supporting

confidence: 91%

Association Between Pancreatic Cancer and Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors Use in a Case-Control Study

Lai

Lin

Liao

2018

Mayo Clinic Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

supporting

confidence: 91%

Association Between Pancreatic Cancer and Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors Use in a Case-Control Study

Lai

Lin

Liao

2018

Mayo Clinic Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

supporting

confidence: 91%

Validity of Mobile-Based Technology vs Direct Observation in Measuring Number of Steps and Distance Walked in 6 Minutes

Poojary

Arora

Britto

et al. 2018

Mayo Clinic Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…However, apps hold great potential by making physical performance measurements for coaches and trainers more affordable in field conditions. A popular recreational example is the various apps designed for tracking distance or pace during endurance sports [30–32]. A real-world app is Strava , commonly used for individuals practicing recreational endurance activities [32].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review of Fitness Apps and Their Potential Clinical and Sports Utility for Objective and Remote Assessment of Cardiorespiratory Fitness

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundCardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) assessment provides key information regarding general health status that has high clinical utility. In addition, in the sports setting, CRF testing is needed to establish a baseline level, prescribe an individualized training program and monitor improvement in athletic performance. As such, the assessment of CRF has both clinical and sports utility. Technological advancements have led to increased digitization within healthcare and athletics. Nevertheless, further investigation is needed to enhance the validity and reliability of existing fitness apps for CRF assessment in both contexts.ObjectivesThe present review aimed to (1) systematically review the scientific literature, examining the validity and reliability of apps designed for CRF assessment; and (2) systematically review and qualitatively score available fitness apps in the two main app markets. Lastly, this systematic review outlines evidence-based practical recommendations for developing future apps that measure CRF.Data SourcesThe following sources were searched for relevant studies: PubMed, Web of Science®, ScopusTM, and SPORTDiscus, and data was also found within app markets (Google Play and the App Store).Study Eligibility CriteriaEligible scientific studies examined the validity and/or reliability of apps for assessing CRF through a field-based fitness test. Criteria for the app markets involved apps that estimated CRF.Study Appraisal and Synthesis MethodsThe scientific literature search included four major electronic databases and the timeframe was set between 01 January 2000 and 31 October 2018. A total of 2796 articles were identified using a set of fitness-related terms, of which five articles were finally selected and included in this review. The app market search was undertaken by introducing keywords into the search engine of each app market without specified search categories. A total of 691 apps were identified using a set of fitness-related terms, of which 88 apps were finally included in the quantitative and qualitative synthesis.ResultsFive studies focused on the scientific validity of fitness tests with apps, while only two of these focused on reliability. Four studies used a sub-maximal fitness test via apps. Out of the scientific apps reviewed, the SA-6MWTapp showed the best validity against a criterion measure (r = 0.88), whilst the InterWalk app showed the highest test–retest reliability (ICC range 0.85–0.86).LimitationsLevels of evidence based on scientific validity/reliability of apps and on commercial apps could not be robustly determined due to the limited number of studies identified in the literature and the low-to-moderate quality of commercial apps.ConclusionsThe results from this scientific review showed that few apps have been empirically tested, and among those that have, not all were valid or reliable. In addition, commercial apps were of low-to-moderate quality, suggesting that their potential for assessing CRF has yet to be realized. Lastly, this manuscript has identified evid...

show abstract

Runtastic PRO app: an excellent all-rounder for logging fitness

Cited by 16 publications

References 2 publications

Association Between Pancreatic Cancer and Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors Use in a Case-Control Study

Association Between Pancreatic Cancer and Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors Use in a Case-Control Study

Validity of Mobile-Based Technology vs Direct Observation in Measuring Number of Steps and Distance Walked in 6 Minutes

A Systematic Review of Fitness Apps and Their Potential Clinical and Sports Utility for Objective and Remote Assessment of Cardiorespiratory Fitness

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About