Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Publication
    Devising a Pace-Based Definition for “The Wall”: An Observational Analysis of Marathoners' Subjective Experiences of Fatigue
    Context Many runners report “hitting The Wall” (HTW) during a marathon (42.2 km). However, the performance manifestation of this subjectively experienced phenomenon remains unclear. Objective To identify a pace-based classification for HTW by integrating subjective reports of fatigue and runners' pacing profiles during a marathon. Design Cross-sectional study. Setting Public race event (2018 Dublin Marathon). Patients or Other Participants Eighty-three runners (28 [34%] women, 55 [66%] men, age = 41.5 ± 9.1 years, height = 1.73 ± 0.09 m, mass = 70.2 ± 10.1 kg). Main Outcome Measure(s) The pacing profiles for respondents to our postrace questionnaire that concerned the phenomenon of HTW were evaluated. Receiver operating characteristic analyses were performed on discretized outcomes of the time series of marathoners' paces during the race. Results Using the receiver operating characteristic analyses, we observed that runners could be classified as having experienced HTW if they ran any 1-km segment 11% slower than the average of the remaining segments of the race (accuracy = 84.6%, sensitivity = 1, specificity = 0.6) or if the standard deviation of the normalized 1-km split times exceeded 0.0532 (accuracy = 83%, sensitivity = 0.818, specificity = 0.8). Similarly, runners could be classified as having experienced HTW if they ran any 5-km segment 7.3% slower than the average of the remaining 5-km segments of the race (accuracy = 84.6%, sensitivity = 1, specificity = 0.644) or if the standard deviation of the normalized 5-km split times exceeded 0.0346 (accuracy = 82%, sensitivity = 0.909, specificity = 0.622). Conclusions These pace-based criteria could be valuable to researchers evaluating HTW prevalence in cohorts for whom they lack subjective questionnaire data.
      231Scopus© Citations 4
  • Publication
    Comparing the Usability and Acceptability of Wearable Sensors Among Older Irish Adults in a Real-World Context: Observational Study
    Background: Wearable devices are valuable assessment tools for patient outcomes in contexts such as clinical trials. To besuccessfully deployed, however, participants must be willing to wear them. Another concern is that usability studies are rarelypublished, often fail to test devices beyond 24 hours, and need to be repeated frequently to ensure that contemporary devices areassessed.Objective: This study aimed to compare multiple wearable sensors in a real-world context to establish their usability within anolder adult (>50 years) population.Methods: Eight older adults wore seven devices for a minimum of 1 week each: Actigraph GT9x, Actibelt, Actiwatch, Biovotion,Hexoskin, Mc10 Biostamp_RC, and Wavelet. Usability was established through mixed methods using semistructured interviewsand three questionnaires, namely, the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI), the System Usability Scale (SUS), and an acceptabilityquestionnaire. Quantitative data were reported descriptively and qualitative data were analyzed using deductive content analysis.Data were then integrated using triangulation.Results: Results demonstrated that no device was considered optimal as all scored below average in the SUS (median, IQR;min-max=57.5, 12.5; 47.5-63.8). Hexoskin was the lowest scored device based on the IMI (3.6; 3.4-4.5), while Biovotion, Actibelt,and Mc10 Biostamp_RC achieved the highest median results on the acceptability questionnaire (3.6 on a 6-point Likert scale).Qualitatively, participants were willing to accept less comfort, less device discretion, and high charging burdens if the deviceswere perceived as useful, namely through the provision of feedback for the user. Participants agreed that the purpose of use is akey enabler for long-term compliance. These views were particularly noted by those not currently wearing an activity-trackingdevice. Participants believed that wrist-worn sensors were the most versatile and easy to use, and therefore, the most suitable forlong-term use. In particular, Actiwatch and Wavelet stood out for their comfort. The convergence of quantitative and qualitativedata was demonstrated in the study.Conclusions: Based on the results, the following context-specific recommendations can be made: (1) researchers should considertheir device selection in relation to both individual and environmental factors, and not simply the primary outcome of the researchstudy; (2) if researchers do not wish their participants to have access to feedback from the devices, then a simple, wrist-worndevice that acts as a watch is preferable; (3) if feedback is allowed, then it should be made available to help participants remainengaged; this is likely to apply only to people without cognitive impairments; (4) battery life of 1 week should be considered as a necessary featire to enhance data capture; (5) researchers should consider providing additional information about the purpose of devices to participants to support their continued use.
      418Scopus© Citations 48
  • Publication
    It's Not as Simple as Just Looking at One Chart: A Qualitative Study Exploring Clinicians Opinions on Various Visualisation Strategies to Represent Longitudinal Actigraphy Data
    Background: Data derived from wearable activity trackers may provide important clinical insights into disease progression and response to intervention, but only if clinicians can interpret it in a meaningful manner. Longitudinal activity data can be visually presented in multiple ways, but research has failed to explore how clinicians interact with and interpret these visualisations. In response, this study developed a variety of visualisations to understand whether alternative data presentation strategies can provide clinicians with meaningful insights into patient’s physical activity patterns. Objective: To explore clinicians’ opinions on different visualisations of actigraphy data. Methods: Four visualisations (stacked bar chart, clustered bar chart, linear heatmap and radial heatmap) were created using Matplotlib and Seaborn Python libraries. A focus group was conducted with 14 clinicians across 2 hospitals. Focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using inductive thematic analysis. Results: Three major themes were identified: (1) the importance of context, (2) interpreting the visualisations and (3) applying visualisations to clinical practice. Although clinicians saw the potential value in the visualisations, they expressed a need for further contextual information to gain clinical benefits from them. Allied health professionals preferred more granular, temporal information compared to doctors. Specifically, physiotherapists favoured heatmaps, whereas the remaining members of the team favoured stacked bar charts. Overall, heatmaps were considered more difficult to interpret. Conclusion: The current lack of contextual data provided by wearables hampers their use in clinical practice. Clinicians favour data presented in a familiar format and yet desire multi-faceted filtering. Future research should implement user-centred design processes to identify ways in which all clinical needs can be met, potentially using an interactive system that caters for multiple levels of granularity. Irrespective of how data is displayed, unless clinicians can apply it in a manner that best supports their role, the potential of this data cannot be fully realised.
      17Scopus© Citations 6