TY - GEN
T1 - Kaloriju patēriņa noteikšanas atšķirības uz veloergometra un mobilajās lietotnēs
AU - Arnis, Voldemārs
AU - Buliņa, Ramona
AU - Veseta, Una
AU - Upeniece, Irēna
AU - Vīnberga, Indra
PY - 2020
Y1 - 2020
N2 - Various technologies are increasingly used in sports and fitness classes. Portable fitness devices are the fastest growing fitness trend worldwide in the recent years (Thompson, 2019). More and more people are using fitness bracelets, smart watches, GPS tracking devices and fitness apps on mobile phones. One of the most commonly used functions in both portable fitness devices and stationarytechnology is the measurement of calories intake. The simplest, most convenient, and cheapest way to measure calorie intake (CI) is smart devices and custom mobile apps (Ramirez, 2018) that store and process data. However, not all of these devices are accurate and objective enough.Aim of the study: to find out and evaluate the calorie intake of a bicycle ergometer and various mobile apps under different physical loads.CI at various physical loads was determined using the MONARK ERGOMEDIC 839E cycling and applications. Comparing the measurement difference between the apps and the ergometer, it was found that the lowest load difference was for all apps, the least difference was for the POLAR app and the highest was for the SAMSUNG app, and the mid to higher load for the SAMSUNG app. App calorie intake figures are closer to those of the ergometer at peak load.
AB - Various technologies are increasingly used in sports and fitness classes. Portable fitness devices are the fastest growing fitness trend worldwide in the recent years (Thompson, 2019). More and more people are using fitness bracelets, smart watches, GPS tracking devices and fitness apps on mobile phones. One of the most commonly used functions in both portable fitness devices and stationarytechnology is the measurement of calories intake. The simplest, most convenient, and cheapest way to measure calorie intake (CI) is smart devices and custom mobile apps (Ramirez, 2018) that store and process data. However, not all of these devices are accurate and objective enough.Aim of the study: to find out and evaluate the calorie intake of a bicycle ergometer and various mobile apps under different physical loads.CI at various physical loads was determined using the MONARK ERGOMEDIC 839E cycling and applications. Comparing the measurement difference between the apps and the ergometer, it was found that the lowest load difference was for all apps, the least difference was for the POLAR app and the highest was for the SAMSUNG app, and the mid to higher load for the SAMSUNG app. App calorie intake figures are closer to those of the ergometer at peak load.
KW - calorie intake, ergometer, mobile app.
UR - http://journals.ru.lv/index.php/SIE/article/view/5183/4753
UR - https://www-webofscience-com.db.rsu.lv/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000835671400005
U2 - 10.17770/sie2020vol6.5183
DO - 10.17770/sie2020vol6.5183
M3 - Conference contribution
VL - 6
T3 - Society. Integration. Education=Sabiedrība. Integrācija. Izglītība
SP - 66
EP - 78
BT - Sabiedrība. Integrācija. Izglītība = Society. Integration. Education
A2 - Lubkina, Velta
A2 - Kaupužs, Aivars
A2 - Znotiņa, Daina
PB - Rēzeknes Tehnoloģiju akadēmija
CY - Rēzekne
T2 - International Scientific Conference “Society. Integration. Education: Sabiedrība. Integrācija. Izglītība”, 2020
Y2 - 22 May 2020 through 23 May 2020
ER -