Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30706234›Full record

SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2019

The Accuracy of Acquiring Heart Rate Variability from Portable Devices: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Ward C Dobbs, Michael V Fedewa, Hayley V MacDonald, Clifton J Holmes, Zackary S Cicone, Daniel J Plews, Michael R Esco

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 104 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
104citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

104 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Momentary physiological indices related to eating disorders: A systematic and methodological review.European eating disorders review : the journal of the Eating Disorders Association · 2024
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Guideline
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Trial
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

44 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Ward C DobbsDepartment of Exercise and Sport Science, University of Wisconsin - La Crosse, La Crosse, WI, USA. wdobbs@uwlax.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7083-7007
Michael V FedewaDepartment of Kinesiology, The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA.
Hayley V MacDonaldDepartment of Kinesiology, The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA.
Clifton J HolmesDepartment of Kinesiology, The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA.
Zackary S CiconeDepartment of Kinesiology, The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA.
Daniel J PlewsSports Performance Research Institute New Zealand (SPRINZ), Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.
Michael R EscoDepartment of Kinesiology, The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdvancements in wearable technology have provided practitioners and researchers with the ability to conveniently measure various health and/or fitness indices. Specifically, portable devices have been devised for convenient recordings of heart rate variability (HRV). Yet, their accuracies remain questionable.

objectiveThe aim was to quantify the accuracy of portable devices compared to electrocardiography (ECG) for measuring a multitude of HRV metrics and to identify potential moderators of this effect.

methodsThis meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Articles published before July 29, 2017 were located via four electronic databases using a combination of the terms related to HRV and validity. Separate effect sizes (ESs), defined as the absolute standardized difference between the HRV value recorded using the portable device compared to ECG, were generated for each HRV metric (ten metrics analyzed in total). A multivariate, multi-level model, incorporating random-effects assumptions, was utilized to quantify the mean ES and 95% confidence interval (CI) and explore potential moderators.

resultsTwenty-three studies yielded 301 effects and revealed that HRV measurements acquired from portable devices differed from those obtained from ECG (ES = 0.23, 95% CI 0.05-0.42), although this effect was small and highly heterogeneous (I

conclusionsOur results suggest that HRV measurements acquired using portable devices demonstrate a small amount of absolute error when compared to ECG. However, this small error is acceptable when considering the improved practicality and compliance of HRV measurements acquired through portable devices in the field setting. Practitioners and researchers should consider the cost-benefit along with the simplicity of the measurement when attempting to increase compliance in acquiring HRV measurements.

Indexed as

ElectrocardiographyWearable Electronic DevicesArrhythmias, CardiacHeart RateHumansReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID30706234

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.