Dynamic Accuracy of GPS Receivers for Use in Health Research: A Novel Method to Assess GPS Accuracy in Real-World Settings

The emergence of portable global positioning system (GPS) receivers over the last 10 years has provided researchers with a means to objectively assess spatial position in free-living conditions. However, the use of GPS in free-living conditions is not without challenges and the aim of this study was to test the dynamic accuracy of a portable GPS device under real-world environmental conditions, for four modes of transport, and using three data collection intervals. We selected four routes on different bearings, passing through a variation of environmental conditions in the City of Copenhagen, Denmark, to test the dynamic accuracy of the Qstarz BT-Q1000XT GPS device. Each route consisted of a walk, bicycle, and vehicle lane in each direction. The actual width of each walking, cycling, and vehicle lane was digitized as accurately as possible using ultra-high-resolution aerial photographs as background. For each trip, we calculated the percentage that actually fell within the lane polygon, and within the 2.5, 5, and 10 m buffers respectively, as well as the mean and median error in meters. Our results showed that 49.6% of all ≈68,000 GPS points fell within 2.5 m of the expected location, 78.7% fell within 10 m and the median error was 2.9 m. The median error during walking trips was 3.9, 2.0 m for bicycle trips, 1.5 m for bus, and 0.5 m for car. The different area types showed considerable variation in the median error: 0.7 m in open areas, 2.6 m in half-open areas, and 5.2 m in urban canyons. The dynamic spatial accuracy of the tested device is not perfect, but we feel that it is within acceptable limits for larger population studies. Longer recording periods, for a larger population are likely to reduce the potentially negative effects of measurement inaccuracy. Furthermore, special care should be taken when the environment in which the study takes place could compromise the GPS signal.

[1]  Chanam Lee,et al.  Assessment of wearable global positioning system units for physical activity research. , 2012, Journal of physical activity & health.

[2]  David Ogilvie,et al.  Use of global positioning systems to study physical activity and the environment: a systematic review. , 2011, American journal of preventive medicine.

[3]  Zhen Liu,et al.  Performances of Different Global Positioning System Devices for Time-Location Tracking in Air Pollution Epidemiological Studies , 2010, Environmental health insights.

[4]  Hans Kromhout,et al.  Performance of GPS-devices for environmental exposure assessment , 2013, Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology.

[5]  Alfredo Morabia,et al.  Air pollution and activity during transportation by car, subway, and walking. , 2009, American journal of preventive medicine.

[6]  P. Christensen,et al.  Is Children's Independent Mobility Really Independent? A Study of Children's Mobility Combining Ethnography and GPS/Mobile Phone Technologies1 , 2009 .

[7]  Melody Oliver,et al.  Linking GPS and travel diary data using sequence alignment in a study of children's independent mobility. , 2011, International journal of health geographics.

[8]  Scott Duncan,et al.  Using global positioning systems in health research: a practical approach to data collection and processing. , 2011, American journal of preventive medicine.

[9]  JoEllen Wilbur,et al.  Activity space environment and dietary and physical activity behaviors: a pilot study. , 2011, Health & place.

[10]  E. Mohammadi,et al.  Barriers and facilitators related to the implementation of a physiological track and trigger system: A systematic review of the qualitative evidence , 2017, International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care.

[11]  Daniel Krewski,et al.  Development of a wearable global positioning system for place and health research , 2008, International journal of health geographics.

[12]  M. Duncan,et al.  Portable global positioning system receivers: static validity and environmental conditions. , 2013, American journal of preventive medicine.

[13]  Kai Elgethun,et al.  Time-location analysis for exposure assessment studies of children using a novel global positioning system instrument. , 2003, Environmental health perspectives.

[14]  C. Baird,et al.  The pilot study. , 2000, Orthopedic nursing.

[15]  Philip J Troped,et al.  Portable global positioning units to complement accelerometry-based physical activity monitors. , 2005, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[16]  J. Wells,et al.  Correlates of physical activity: why are some people physically active and others not? , 2012, The Lancet.