Table 2.
Digital health device data
| Resilient (n = 75) | Concordant (n = 145) | Uncoupled (n = 47) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weight (kg)a,b,c | 71.7 ± 14.6 | 81.7 ± 21.4 | 92.4 ± 19.5 | < 0.01 |
| Difference between self-reported and digital device measured (kg)b,c | −1.1 ± 3.7 | −0.9 ± 4.1 | 1.3 ± 5.5 | < 0.01 |
| BMI (kg/m2)a,b,c | 25.5 ± 4.5 | 28.9 ± 7.5 | 32.6 ± 6.3 | < 0.01 |
| Difference between self-reported and digital device measured (kg/m2)b,c | -0.4 ± 1.3 | -0.3 ± 1.5 | 0.4 ± 1.9 | < 0.01 |
| Healthy weight score (%)a,b,c | < 0.01 | |||
| Poor | 16.0 | 35.2 | 61.7 | |
| Intermediate | 32.0 | 31.0 | 34.0 | |
| Ideal | 52.0 | 33.8 | 4.3 | |
| LS7 Health Score with Device Weight Scorea,b,c | 7.8 ± 0.8 | 7.0 ± 1.4 | 5.8 ± 0.6 | < 0.01 |
| Resilient (n = 77) | Concordant (n = 164) | Uncoupled (n = 51) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moderate exercise (min/week)a | 99.6 ± 116.6 | 158.6 ± 188.1 | 120.4 ± 174.9 | < 0.04 |
| Difference between self-reported and digital device measured (min) | 102.1 ± 202.6 | 66.4 ± 254.0 | 54.3 ± 219.4 | 0.45 |
| Vigorous exercise (min/week) | 160.3 ± 187.2 | 199.5 ± 284.4 | 133.5 ± 153.8 | 0.18 |
| Difference between self-reported and digital device measured (min) | −77.9 ± 179.9 | −97.0 ± 282.1 | −97.9 ± 156.0 | 0.83 |
| Physical activity score (%) | 0.56 | |||
| Poor | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| Intermediate | 37.7 | 36.0 | 47.1 | |
| Ideal | 62.3 | 64.0 | 52.9 | |
| LS7 health score with device activity scorea,b,c | 7.8 ± 0.9 | 7.0 ± 1.4 | 5.8 ± 0.7 | < 0.01 |
| Resilient (n = 71) | Concordant (n = 139) | Uncoupled (n = 45) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LS7 Health score with both weight and activity scorea,b,c | 7.7 ± 0.9 | 7.0 ± 1.5 | 5.9 ± 0.7 | < 0.01 |
| Resilient (n = 84) | Concordant (n = 171) | Uncoupled (n = 52) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Daily steps | 8027.4 ± 4020.4 | 8794.5 ± 5083.5 | 7683.0 ± 3948.8 | 0.22 |
Categorical variables are analyzed by Chi-Square test. Continuous variables are analyzed by ANOVA. Post-hoc comparisons were done by Bonferroni correction. Non-parametric variables were analyzed by Kruskal–Wallis test. Post-hoc comparisons were done by Dunn’s test.
aP < 0.05 Resilient versus Concordant
bP < 0.05 Resilient versus Uncoupled
cP < 0.05 Concordant versus Uncoupled