PTOTOtherJMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies2023

Smartphone Global Positioning System-Based System to Assess Mobility in Health Research: Development, Accuracy, and Usability Study.

Robert P Spang, Christine Haeger, Sandra A Mümken and 3 others

PMID 36862498

WHAT IT FOUND

An open-source smartphone GPS system correctly labelled 97.40% of all samples. 9 older adults tested it, and results indicated easy integration into daily life.

It measures out-of-home mobility, not a treatment.

Key findings

01The system correctly labelled 97.40% of 122,808 GPS samples and detected 667 of 692 diary stops.

02Adding accelerometer motion data reduced fragmented stops from 43 to 19.

03In the usability test, 8 of 9 older adults fully agreed they had little worries about data security or damage to the phone.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The accuracy test used a diary as ground truth, but the paper does not state how many people produced the 692 stops. The usability test included only 9 community-dwelling older adults from rural Germany, so it does not show how other patients or urban settings would use the app. The study reports measurement performance, not clinical outcomes, so it does not show that using the system improves mobility or health. Setting up the system requires technical resources and know-how, even though the software is open source. Misclassifications occurred, including missed stops, missed trips, and fragmented stops.

Declared interests

The study was conducted in the context of the MOBILE study funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

The easy way to misread this

Do not read this as evidence that the app improves mobility. It is a measurement system tested for accuracy and usability, not a clinical intervention, and the usability sample was 9 older adults.

Read it on PubMed →