Authors
Songdhasn Chinapong, Institute of Nutrition, Mahidol University, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand
Korntawat Klinchan, College of Sports Science and Technology, Mahidol University, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand
Hanif Abdul Rahman, PAPRSB Institute of Health Sciences and School of Digital Science, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Gadong, Brunei Darussalam
Michael Chia, Physical Education & Sports Science Department, National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
Waris Wongpipit, [1]5Division of Health and Physical Education, Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand,[2]6Research Unit for Sports Management & Physical Activity Policy (RUSMPAP), Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand
Jetsada Arnin, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Mahidol University, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand
Areekul Amornsriwatanakul, College of Sports Science and Technology, Mahidol University, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand
International Journal of Exercise Science 18(2): 794-810, 2025.
DOI: 10.70252/NOCK5583
Abstract
Accurate physical activity (PA) measurement is crucial for public health surveillance. While self-report questionnaires are commonly used, they have limitations, especially in young children. An affordable and user-friendly device like Feelfit® offers a promising alternative particularly for countries with limited research resources. This study aimed to evaluate Feelfit®’s performance against the widely used ActiGraph® accelerometer in measuring PA among children. A quasi-experimental design was applied. Thirty-nine children (19 boys; 20 girls; aged 11.4 ± 0.5 years) wore both Feelfit® and ActiGraph® during sequentially specified activities of varying intensity ranging from sedentary to vigorous. Data were analysed using paired t-tests, Bland-Altman plots, and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) to assess agreement, precision, and reliability. Feelfit® showed good agreement with ActiGraph® for moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) but overestimated sedentary time and underestimated light PA. It demonstrated better precision for MVPA but low reliability for light PA. Intra-class correlation coefficients were moderate for MVPA (ICC = 0.43), but poor for sedentary time (ICC = 0.11). Feelfit® is a suitable option for measuring MVPA in children, offering acceptable validity and reliability compared to ActiGraph®. However, improvements are needed for accurate measure of sedentary and light activities. Despite these limitations, Feelfit®’s affordability and ease of use make it a valuable tool for use in small- to large-scale research and in resource-limited settings.
Recommended Citation
Chinapong, Songdhasn; Klinchan, Korntawat; Rahman, Hanif Abdul; Chia, Michael; Wongpipit, Waris; Arnin, Jetsada; Amornsriwatanakul, Areekul (2025) “Validity and Reliability of the ‘Feelfit®’ Accelerometer in Evaluating Physical Activity and Sedentary Time in Children: A Comparative Study with Two Different Accelerometers,” International Journal of Exercise Science: Vol. 18 : Iss. 2, Pages 794 – 810.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.70252/NOCK5583