REVIEW:
MORE THAN FASHION:
THE RISE OF WEARABLE TECH
Sales of activity monitors are through the roof, and Santa will be stuffing a fair
few in stockings this Christmas. But are they really doing what they claim?
WORDS: ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR MIKE CLIMSTEIN & JOE WALSH
Title: Comparison of different activity monitors
Author: Yang Bai (MSc) et al. (Dept of Kinesiology
Iowa State University & University of Nebraska
(Omaha), USA)
Source: Medicine and Science in Sports & Exercise
(2015). ePub ahead of print.
Introduction: It’s always pleasing to save
a couple of hours hunting for something by
discovering the ideal candidate at the very
start of your search.
When it comes to selecting which recent
research to review for Network magazine,
Joe and I usually spend two or three hours
each on a Sunday evening completing journal
searches, before Skyping to deliberate over
the various merits of those we’ve shortlisted.
We then develop a spreadsheet of all
the eligible articles, which we then rank,
listing their individual pro’s and con’s and
assigning each of them a ‘readers interest’
ranking. To sum up: it’s a fair amount of work
preparing, however we actually write the
Research Review in a fairly short period of
time. Well, Christmas came early this year,
as we were pointed in the direction of this
issue’s research article by Network’s editor,
and it ticked all the boxes.
The article, ‘Comparison of different
activity monitors’, is hot off the press
(i.