Running and Smartwatches
The study presented here was designed to evaluate the accuracy of three different sports watches in estimating energy expenditure during aerobic and anaerobic running.
Twenty trained subjects were
ran at varying intensities while wearing three commercial sports watches (Suunto Ambit2, Garmin Forerunner 920XT, and Polar V800). Indirect calorimetry was used as the reference scale for assessing energy expenditure, and various equations were applied to calculate energy expenditure from gas exchange values for aerobic and anaerobic running.
As a result.
The accuracy of energy expenditure estimation was intensity dependent for all the watches tested, and during aerobic exercise (4-11 km / h), a mean absolute percentage error value of -25.16% to + 38.09% was observed, with the Polar V800 performing most accurately.The Garmin Forerunner 920 XT significantly underestimated energy expenditure in the slowest stages, while the Suunto Ambit2 significantly overestimated energy expenditure in the two slowest stages.
During anaerobic exercise (14-17 km / h), all three clocks significantly underestimated energy expenditure by -21.62% to -49.30%. Thus, as the anaerobic running speed increased, the error in estimating energy expenditure systematically increased.
In conclusion, the Polar V800 was the model that properly estimated the amount of energy expended for aerobic exercise, while the other models underestimated and overestimated it. The other models underestimated and overestimated the amount of energy expended, and all models showed large measurement errors for anaerobic exercise, so it was concluded that the algorithm needs to be improved.
Roos, L., Taube, W., Beeler, N. et al. Validity of sports watches when estimating energy expenditure during running. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil 9, 22 (2017 ). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13102-017-0089-6
Conclusion
The results showed that one of the three models was able to adequately assess aerobic exercise, but none of the three was able to adequately assess anaerobic energy expenditure.
Therefore, the study commented that these devices are insufficient for athletes who want to properly evaluate the intensity of exercise, so it was positioned as a device that can be used by those who want a guideline. This study was published in December 2017, so there may be more accurate ones available now.
However, it seems that there are advantages and disadvantages in the measurement methods used in research, and the MAOD method has some disadvantages such as being underestimated, so please think that evaluation is really difficult.
The MAOD method is underestimated, so it's really difficult to evaluate. Also, this study was done only with running, so it may not be the same with other aerobic exercises. Lastly, I looked up the relevant model on Amazon, and it was a good price. I did not want one.
