TY - JOUR
T1 - Establishing a Global Standard for Wearable Devices in Sport and Exercise Medicine
T2 - Perspectives from Academic and Industry Stakeholders
AU - Ash, Garrett I.
AU - Stults-Kolehmainen, Matthew
AU - Busa, Michael A.
AU - Gaffey, Allison E.
AU - Angeloudis, Konstantinos
AU - Muniz-Pardos, Borja
AU - Gregory, Robert
AU - Huggins, Robert A.
AU - Redeker, Nancy S.
AU - Weinzimer, Stuart A.
AU - Grieco, Lauren A.
AU - Lyden, Kate
AU - Megally, Esmeralda
AU - Vogiatzis, Ioannis
AU - Scher, Laurie Ann
AU - Zhu, Xinxin
AU - Baker, Julien S.
AU - Brandt, Cynthia
AU - Businelle, Michael S.
AU - Fucito, Lisa M.
AU - Griggs, Stephanie
AU - Jarrin, Robert
AU - Mortazavi, Bobak J.
AU - Prioleau, Temiloluwa
AU - Roberts, Walter
AU - Spanakis, Elias K.
AU - Nally, Laura M.
AU - Debruyne, Andre
AU - Bachl, Norbert
AU - Pigozzi, Fabio
AU - Halabchi, Farzin
AU - Ramagole, Dimakatso A.
AU - Janse van Rensburg, Dina C.
AU - Wolfarth, Bernd
AU - Fossati, Chiara
AU - Rozenstoka, Sandra
AU - Tanisawa, Kumpei
AU - Börjesson, Mats
AU - Casajus, José Antonio
AU - Gonzalez-Aguero, Alex
AU - Zelenkova, Irina
AU - Swart, Jeroen
AU - Gursoy, Gamze
AU - Meyerson, William
AU - Liu, Jason
AU - Greenbaum, Dov
AU - Pitsiladis, Yannis P.
AU - Gerstein, Mark B.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.
PY - 2021/11
Y1 - 2021/11
N2 - Millions of consumer sport and fitness wearables (CSFWs) are used worldwide, and millions of datapoints are generated by each device. Moreover, these numbers are rapidly growing, and they contain a heterogeneity of devices, data types, and contexts for data collection. Companies and consumers would benefit from guiding standards on device quality and data formats. To address this growing need, we convened a virtual panel of industry and academic stakeholders, and this manuscript summarizes the outcomes of the discussion. Our objectives were to identify (1) key facilitators of and barriers to participation by CSFW manufacturers in guiding standards and (2) stakeholder priorities. The venues were the Yale Center for Biomedical Data Science Digital Health Monthly Seminar Series (62 participants) and the New England Chapter of the American College of Sports Medicine Annual Meeting (59 participants). In the discussion, stakeholders outlined both facilitators of (e.g., commercial return on investment in device quality, lucrative research partnerships, and transparent and multilevel evaluation of device quality) and barriers (e.g., competitive advantage conflict, lack of flexibility in previously developed devices) to participation in guiding standards. There was general agreement to adopt Keadle et al.’s standard pathway for testing devices (i.e., benchtop, laboratory, field-based, implementation) without consensus on the prioritization of these steps. Overall, there was enthusiasm not to add prescriptive or regulatory steps, but instead create a networking hub that connects companies to consumers and researchers for flexible guidance navigating the heterogeneity, multi-tiered development, dynamicity, and nebulousness of the CSFW field.
AB - Millions of consumer sport and fitness wearables (CSFWs) are used worldwide, and millions of datapoints are generated by each device. Moreover, these numbers are rapidly growing, and they contain a heterogeneity of devices, data types, and contexts for data collection. Companies and consumers would benefit from guiding standards on device quality and data formats. To address this growing need, we convened a virtual panel of industry and academic stakeholders, and this manuscript summarizes the outcomes of the discussion. Our objectives were to identify (1) key facilitators of and barriers to participation by CSFW manufacturers in guiding standards and (2) stakeholder priorities. The venues were the Yale Center for Biomedical Data Science Digital Health Monthly Seminar Series (62 participants) and the New England Chapter of the American College of Sports Medicine Annual Meeting (59 participants). In the discussion, stakeholders outlined both facilitators of (e.g., commercial return on investment in device quality, lucrative research partnerships, and transparent and multilevel evaluation of device quality) and barriers (e.g., competitive advantage conflict, lack of flexibility in previously developed devices) to participation in guiding standards. There was general agreement to adopt Keadle et al.’s standard pathway for testing devices (i.e., benchtop, laboratory, field-based, implementation) without consensus on the prioritization of these steps. Overall, there was enthusiasm not to add prescriptive or regulatory steps, but instead create a networking hub that connects companies to consumers and researchers for flexible guidance navigating the heterogeneity, multi-tiered development, dynamicity, and nebulousness of the CSFW field.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85114050708&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s40279-021-01543-5
DO - 10.1007/s40279-021-01543-5
M3 - Article
C2 - 34468950
AN - SCOPUS:85114050708
SN - 0112-1642
VL - 51
SP - 2237
EP - 2250
JO - Sports Medicine
JF - Sports Medicine
IS - 11
ER -