Doctors Don't Care About Your Fitness-Tracker Data

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
According to a recent study, doctors do not care about your stupid fitness-tracker data...and they probably don't like you either. ;)

Wearable producers such as Apple, Fitbit, and Pebble will ship more than 76 million of the devices by the end of the year, according to market research firm IDC. Some doctors and researchers, however, remain unimpressed, They question the value of the particular metrics tracked, as well as the validity of the deluge of data these gadgets produce.
 
If this is a secret, it's the worst held one in the history of ever. (Hyperbole for humor!)

Best reason for the fitness-tracker is probably the Hawthorne Effect. Although behavioral feedback like this has perverse outcomes as well; e.g, "Hey, I walked this many steps today, yes, a bacon hamburger is in order!"
 
In other words Dr's don't care about how you track your fitness. They want you to go pay them to track your fitness. Because, money.
 
HydroBudz said:
In other words Dr's don't care about how you track your fitness. They want you to go pay them to track your fitness. Because, money.
Click to expand...

No, that's completely incorrect. They don't care about you tracking your fitness because it's irrelevant.
 
Or GIGO? At least the physicians I've seen have asked about my lifestyle and look at my present vitals, which probably tells them more than your fitbit, et al, does.

Not that you should take my words as gospel (ever, for anyone), but I do research on medical devices, so I might have a bit more experience in this world. These fitness trackers have very simple and indirect sensors and who-knows-what they do for signal conditioning, so the data coming off of them is, well, treated with a healthy dose of salt. Not that they don't have promise, especially if the data can be standardized (with decent traceability) and presented in a digestible fashion, but that's not the case now, and will cost money.

TL;DR: they're basically toys that are lapped up by the public as legitimate. Manufacturers are driving that script as well. Because, money.
 
I love my Microsoft Band. If I see I'm not reaching my goal, I'll take a walk. I'm more conscience of how much I walk and sleep now. I'm more aware of it. I do use it to track my walks and runs and to see how much I'm improving over time (using GPS & time vs. steps taken, which isn't always hugely accurate). That data is worthless to anyone buy myself. My Doctor cares that I'm active, but the data from my watch isn't important.

The steps aren't going to be accurate. Close enough, though. Good for a rough estimate. I don't care if I'm walking 4.7 miles or 5 miles a day. I'm walking close to it, which is enough for me.
 
So, after reading the article - the 2 key take-aways are that doctors don't like fitness tracking because:
1) The devices themselves are not certified to medical-grade fidelity standards
2) The data these devices produce is simply too general, and therefore useless - especially to the specialist doctors
3) There are no special "apps" to take this general data and compose/massage it into useful intelligence for doctors of different specialties.

I see plenty of room for innovation here....too bad i don't have the 10s and 100s of millions it would take to get anything off the ground.
 
Ur_Mom said:
My Doctor cares that I'm active, but the data from my watch isn't important.
Click to expand...

This.

The actual numbers mater much less than the fact that you are getting exercise. If having a fitness tracker encourages you to get more exercise, then use one. Don't expect your Dr. to analyze the data to figure out if you are actually getting the perfect amount of exercise.

Having a basic device to take your pulse/oxygen level and something to check your blood pressure if you are getting older is all most people need.
 
Ur_Mom said:
My Doctor cares that I'm active, but the data from my watch isn't important.
Click to expand...
Exactly, this is how it often goes

Doctor (or nurse who's pre-screening): Are you physically active
Me: Yes
Dr: How much exercise do you get a day on average
Me: 30 minutes
Dr: *enters data* ok, so why are you here today?
The only reason they might care what you're doing as far as activity is if you're counting going to the fridge to get a new beer as activity.

Also here's breaking news too, doctors don't care what you read on WebMD (or any number of sites) and what you might have either, you tell them your issue, you tell them your symptoms, and you let them diagnose the problem. Telling them you think you might have Mongolian Yak Flu because you spit up green stuff with a loogie, and WebMD gave that search result a 90% hit is kind of stupid.
 
I always felt the data was for the end user and not the doctor. It's just help for when the doctor says "you need to walk more" or asks "how active are you?"

It's hard to keep track of your metrics by yourself. So these devices allow you to say, "I walk about 40minutes a day".
 
They really weren't made for you to track info to give to your doctor. The info is for you to help your workout/fitness routine etc. This is live giving my computer setup info to my plumber... he doesn't care, it wasn't made for him.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Also here's breaking news too, doctors don't care what you read on WebMD (or any number of sites) and what you might have either, you tell them your issue, you tell them your symptoms, and you let them diagnose the problem. Telling them you think you might have Mongolian Yak Flu because you spit up green stuff with a loogie, and WebMD gave that search result a 90% hit is kind of stupid.
Click to expand...

And if you count on the doctor always being correct in their diagnosis and always prescribing the proper medications, then you likely believe those popup security warnings on your computer.

Too often they will just prescribe some pills for your symptoms and won't tell you about the possible side effects of the medication which may make your problems even worse. Sometimes there are more natural options, like adjusting your diet, getting more exercise, etc.

In other words, you need to take control of you health care, and that includes researching any health problems so you can have a proper conversation with your doctor and find the correct solution.
 
nutzo said:
Sometimes there are more natural options, like adjusting your diet, getting more exercise, etc.
Click to expand...

That cures a lot of ailments that people have. For others, a better treatment is necessary. But, eating right and exercise is one of the biggest preventative things you can do. Just a huge thing. Sadly, people don't have time, patience, effort (too lazy), or knowledge on how to do it right.

For me, I'm not looking to lose weight. I'm looking to be healthy. losing weight is just the byproduct of that. I'm not obese or anything (170# 5'10"), but I have more body fat than I'd like. Plus, I can't run a mile. I can run 1/2 mile before I need to start walking, but I'm getting father than I used to! I'm also getting more flexible.
 
Keep at it Ur_Mom! (suppressed laughter here)

The amount of money spent on lifestyle-caused diseases is a terrifying percentage of the overall cost of healthcare in industrialized nations.
 
The story, and the various coverage reads like it has a slight bias towards making it seem like doctors are old fuddy-duddies who are resistant to change.

They keep using that "I have no idea what to do with that" in ways where they are trying to make it seems like he saying "I'm confused and stupid" rather than "This is useless information".

I view it like when my aunt is having problems with her PC and helpfully suggests that the 15 year old AOL CD that came through the door she filed away might be helpful to me.
 
I'm a part of a couple medical device entrepreneur online groups (keeping a pulse, sometimes there a good article), and the language is the same. Doctors are too old/fuddy duddy/behind the times for all our new cool stuff...

The physicians I know don't fit that mold at all (they assuredly exist, because human beings), but are conservative and demand well-vetted data.
 
Derfnofred said:
Or GIGO? At least the physicians I've seen have asked about my lifestyle and look at my present vitals, which probably tells them more than your fitbit, et al, does.

Not that you should take my words as gospel (ever, for anyone), but I do research on medical devices, so I might have a bit more experience in this world. These fitness trackers have very simple and indirect sensors and who-knows-what they do for signal conditioning, so the data coming off of them is, well, treated with a healthy dose of salt. Not that they don't have promise, especially if the data can be standardized (with decent traceability) and presented in a digestible fashion, but that's not the case now, and will cost money.

TL;DR: they're basically toys that are lapped up by the public as legitimate. Manufacturers are driving that script as well. Because, money.
Click to expand...

They are useful for demonstrating that despite most people thinking they are not totally sedentary slugs, that you might be wrong about that.

I've used them, and the primary value has been that they taught me my ability to determine what a "normal" day is in terms of activity is total crap. The tracker is much better, and "magically" once I more accurately determined such, calorie counting worked better.

They tell you NOTHING about your health.
 
nutzo said:
And if you count on the doctor always being correct in their diagnosis and always prescribing the proper medications, then you likely believe those popup security warnings on your computer.

Too often they will just prescribe some pills for your symptoms and won't tell you about the possible side effects of the medication which may make your problems even worse. Sometimes there are more natural options, like adjusting your diet, getting more exercise, etc.

In other words, you need to take control of you health care, and that includes researching any health problems so you can have a proper conversation with your doctor and find the correct solution.
Click to expand...

Indeed... and often time, you know what you got, and they will still diagnose you because they can charge you more. Obviously, you can't say all doctors are doing it like so, but I can't help but think most doctors is all about the money.
 
That was the gist of my first message about the Hawthorne Effect. That which gets measured gets improved.

* Toy was an overstatement, as the behavioral feedback is *hopefully* net positive (as you note yourself!)
 
Quix said:
No, that's completely incorrect. They don't care about you tracking your fitness because it's irrelevant.
Click to expand...

That is very much 20th Century thinking. Because Drs are so busy practicing medicine, they dont often keep up with Information Age advances like they do medical ones.Sure they are great at the newest shiny procedure or giant scanner, but they dont handle big data very well at all. They dont think in terms of very large numbers.

It is resistance to change and lack of time/interest. Daily tracking should be encouraged if the patient wants it, and Dr.s should be working on wayss to accommodate that data into the patients overall medical record. We are DEEP into an Information Age, lets start acting like it.
 
Doctors don't care because those fitness trackers are so easy to manipulate. My office mate has one, it tracks steps taken by the swing of the arm it's on (like when a person is walking). So what does he do? Swings his arm while in front of his computer eating junk food.
 
Spire3660 said:
That is very much 20th Century thinking. Because Drs are so busy practicing medicine, they dont often keep up with Information Age advances like they do medical ones.Sure they are great at the newest shiny procedure or giant scanner, but they dont handle big data very well at all. They dont think in terms of very large numbers.

It is resistance to change and lack of time/interest. Daily tracking should be encouraged if the patient wants it, and Dr.s should be working on wayss to accommodate that data into the patients overall medical record. We are DEEP into an Information Age, lets start acting like it.
Click to expand...

http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124

Yes, we're DEEP into an Information Age, let's start acting like it by knowing what's useful and what's junk.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Also here's breaking news too, doctors don't care what you read on WebMD (or any number of sites) and what you might have either, you tell them your issue, you tell them your symptoms, and you let them diagnose the problem. Telling them you think you might have Mongolian Yak Flu because you spit up green stuff with a loogie, and WebMD gave that search result a 90% hit is kind of stupid.
Click to expand...

Doctors hate it when people self diagnose with WebMD and call in with their own diagnosis. BUT they do like WebMD because it offers great recommendations for self remedies and offers people plenty of good solutions other than going straight to a doctor.

I had a doctor even recommend me to use WebMD to look up home remedies the next time I get sick or one of my kids gets sick versus jumping straight to him.

Spire3660 said:
That is very much 20th Century thinking. Because Drs are so busy practicing medicine, they dont often keep up with Information Age advances like they do medical ones.Sure they are great at the newest shiny procedure or giant scanner, but they dont handle big data very well at all. They dont think in terms of very large numbers.

It is resistance to change and lack of time/interest. Daily tracking should be encouraged if the patient wants it, and Dr.s should be working on wayss to accommodate that data into the patients overall medical record. We are DEEP into an Information Age, lets start acting like it.
Click to expand...

No these trackers offer little information that is of value. If you want valuable information on FITNESS go see a trainer. Don't take up a doctors time with the crappy information you get from a fatbit.

These trackers are good for a few things that are good for the individual.
 
All I know is that my family are pretty lazy, but we got trackers and our data is shared, so out of competitiveness or at least shaming, we ensure that we do a certain amount of walking and stairs a week. Yes, I could take the elevator, but then I don't get the satisfaction of having done the most stairs of anybody that week by going up from 2nd to 13th floor.
 
Ducman69 said:
All I know is that my family are pretty lazy, but we got trackers and our data is shared, so out of competitiveness or at least shaming, we ensure that we do a certain amount of walking and stairs a week. Yes, I could take the elevator, but then I don't get the satisfaction of having done the most stairs of anybody that week by going up from 2nd to 13th floor.
Click to expand...

That's great for you. Doctor just needs to know you're active and if a fitness tracker helps you do such, that's awesome.

Me, I have a watch. I walk, I look at the time, and I figure out how long I've walked. I don't need to know how many steps I took and even then, it's not like it's accurate in that regards anyways. Especially now with it being cold and most ppl are walking around with their hands in their pockets, with little to no arm swing. You could walk 10k steps and the thing only registers 100.
 
There's one thing I've been wondering for a while now. What is the most accurate way to measure the amount of calories that are being burned while doing something like walking or jogging? If something can measure you moving speed, sea level/elevation, your heart rate, and knows how old you are how close can it reasonably get to being accurate? What are the main variables that should be considered?
 
Mangudai said:
There's one thing I've been wondering for a while now. What is the most accurate way to measure the amount of calories that are being burned while doing something like walking or jogging? If something can measure you moving speed, sea level/elevation, your heart rate, and knows how old you are how close can it reasonably get to being accurate? What are the main variables that should be considered?
Click to expand...

Probably other variables that can mess things up too, like if I was smoking a cigarette and drinking Red Bull while I was walking. That'd change my heart rate.

At the same time, you can have someone who is extremely fit to begin with, like cross country skiers. It takes a bit more exercise to get their heart rates to go up.
 
Wait, doctors care?????? Look, my general is good but the rest of them are not worth a hill of beans. On the other hand, I use my fitness tracking because I am a runner and it has a built in GPS. :)
 
krotch said:
That's great for you. Doctor just needs to know you're active and if a fitness tracker helps you do such, that's awesome.

Me, I have a watch. I walk, I look at the time, and I figure out how long I've walked. I don't need to know how many steps I took and even then, it's not like it's accurate in that regards anyways. Especially now with it being cold and most ppl are walking around with their hands in their pockets, with little to no arm swing. You could walk 10k steps and the thing only registers 100.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don't share it with my doc, just with family and it motivates us to show off or at least not be shamed as the slacker.

Regarding accuracy, I'm sure it has a good margin for error, but I checked right now and it recorded accurately my steps with my hands in my pocket. It does not however register my steps if I'm looking at it while walking. So I don't think hand swinging is necessary, but shock to the unit is. In your pocket, it still feels a bump, bump, bump, bump as you walk, but held in front of you its too shock absorbed to register it as a step.
 
Fitness trackers are stupid addons for already stupid phones. Just go out and exercise people. Stop being big fat fatty fats with your controller or mouse-y in your hand without ever standing up to move around.
 
2 main reasons docs don't care about fitness trackers.

First is because most of the time the data quality they produce is crap.

Seriously most of them are just glorified actigraphy + a really bad heart monitor that can barely get a reading of your P wave off your wrist when you're lying still much less moving around.

All those pretty charts and such they generate? There is a whole lot of guess work and half assed averaging going on there. You're not getting a good reflection of reality. At all.

To get a good idea of what is going on you (or the doctor) need high quality data. To get high quality data you need a fair amount of equipment (costs lots) and experienced people to run and interpret the information that is produced (costs lots too) into a report that is readable for you or a doctor.

Most people don't want to pay for that, cuz' its expensive, or do it even if they have the money, cuz' it is a hassle. Its also pointless, because of the second reason docs don't care about fitness trackers:

They just have to look at your physical condition vs your previous visit. Weight, blood pressure, BMI, diet, etc. All of this is easy, quick, and cheap to measure. So exercise, change your diet to include more veggies and less fat or carbs, and then get your vitals or BMI checked once or twice a month. If your regimen is effective you'll see an improvement over that time frame. Possibly faster depending on how aggressive you are. THAT is an effective and useful means of measuring improvement.

Trackers themselves are mostly theater and you don't need or benefit much at best from one at all.
 
Mangudai said:
There's one thing I've been wondering for a while now. What is the most accurate way to measure the amount of calories that are being burned while doing something like walking or jogging? If something can measure you moving speed, sea level/elevation, your heart rate, and knows how old you are how close can it reasonably get to being accurate? What are the main variables that should be considered?
Click to expand...

There really isn't a good way without a visit to a university with a top-flite exercise physiology program to give you a ballpark idea. But we really don't need exquisite precision. If you're generally keeping track of your calories and weight, you'll have a decent idea of your caloric balance. Exercise *isn't* a good way to lose weight--it's absolutely invaluable for a multitude of reasons, but it's really hard to burn sufficient calories by exercise for legitimate weight loss. It ultimately comes down to what goes in your mouth (exercise will modulate your appetite, and the salutary mental health aspects of exercise do help many with eating behaviors).

In short, running economy, especially over varied terrain is a tough problem. It's really better to black box it. (or better yet, not worry about it!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top