ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2019
Heart Rate Measures From Wrist-Worn Activity Trackers in a Laboratory and Free-Living Setting: Validation Study.
Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Recommendations for determining the validity of consumer wearable heart rate devices: expert statement and checklist of the INTERLIVE Network.British journal of sports medicine · 2021Guideline
- Ambulatory and successive home-based heart rate targeted aerobic training improves arterial parameters: a follow-up study in people with metabolic syndrome.Annals of medicine · 2023Trial
- Listen to Your Heart-Ecological Momentary Assessment of Interoceptive Accuracy, Awareness and Sensibility: A Pilot Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Trial
- The Representation of Different Populations in Studies Assessing the Validity of Consumer Wearable Photoplethysmography-Based Measurements: Scoping Review.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Article
- Association of Novel Oral Appliance Use With Heart Rate Variability in Adolescent Athletes.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026Article
- Impact of a combined care ambulatory and home-based aerobic exercise program using wearables on anxiety and depression in patients with metabolic syndrome.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- The Effect of the Nasal Airflow Reducer on Parasympathetic Activity in Adults: A Pilot and Exploratory Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Novel Virtual Reality Intervention for Stress Reduction Among Patients With or at Risk for Cardiovascular Disease: Mixed Methods Pilot Study.JMIR cardio · 2025Article
- Wrist-Worn and Arm-Worn Wearables for Monitoring Heart Rate During Sedentary and Light-to-Vigorous Physical Activities: Device Validation Study.JMIR cardio · 2025Article
- Laboratory comparison of consumer-grade and research-established wearables for monitoring heart rate, body temperature, and physical acitivity in sub-Saharan Africa.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Article
- A Situational Analysis of the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Digital Health Research Initiatives in South Asia.Cureus · 2023Review
- PhysioKit: An Open-Source, Low-Cost Physiological Computing Toolkit for Single- and Multi-User Studies.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Evaluating the Potential of an Oral-Based Bioguard to Estimate Heart Rate Using Photoplethysmography.Biosensors · 2023Article
- Article
- Comparing a Fitbit Wearable to an Electrocardiogram Gold Standard as a Measure of Heart Rate Under Psychological Stress: A Validation Study.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
- Wearable activity trackers-advanced technology or advanced marketing?European journal of applied physiology · 2022Review
- Estimation of Heart Rate and Energy Expenditure Using a Smart Bracelet during Different Exercise Intensities: A Reliability and Validity Study.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Emotion Regulation, Parasympathetic Function, and Psychological Well-Being.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Heart Rate and Distance Measurement of Two Multisport Activity Trackers and a Cellphone App in Different Sports: A Cross-Sectional Validation and Comparison Field Study.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Assessing the Accuracy of Popular Commercial Technologies That Measure Resting Heart Rate and Heart Rate Variability.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWrist-worn activity trackers are popular, and an increasing number of these devices are equipped with heart rate (HR) measurement capabilities. However, the validity of HR data obtained from such trackers has not been thoroughly assessed outside the laboratory setting.
objectiveThis study aimed to investigate the validity of HR measures of a high-cost consumer-based tracker (Polar A370) and a low-cost tracker (Tempo HR) in the laboratory and free-living settings.
methodsParticipants underwent a laboratory-based cycling protocol while wearing the two trackers and the chest-strapped Polar H10, which acted as criterion. Participants also wore the devices throughout the waking hours of the following day during which they were required to conduct at least one 10-min bout of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) to ensure variability in the HR signal. We extracted 10-second values from all devices and time-matched HR data from the trackers with those from the Polar H10. We calculated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), mean absolute errors, and mean absolute percentage errors (MAPEs) between the criterion and the trackers. We constructed decile plots that compared HR data from Tempo HR and Polar A370 with criterion measures across intensity deciles. We investigated how many HR data points within the MVPA zone (≥64% of maximum HR) were detected by the trackers.
resultsOf the 57 people screened, 55 joined the study (mean age 30.5 [SD 9.8] years). Tempo HR showed moderate agreement and large errors (laboratory: ICC 0.51 and MAPE 13.00%; free-living: ICC 0.71 and MAPE 10.20%). Polar A370 showed moderate-to-strong agreement and small errors (laboratory: ICC 0.73 and MAPE 6.40%; free-living: ICC 0.83 and MAPE 7.10%). Decile plots indicated increasing differences between Tempo HR and the criterion as HRs increased. Such trend was less pronounced when considering the Polar A370 HR data. Tempo HR identified 62.13% (1872/3013) and 54.27% (5717/10,535) of all MVPA time points in the laboratory phase and free-living phase, respectively. Polar A370 detected 81.09% (2273/2803) and 83.55% (9323/11,158) of all MVPA time points in the laboratory phase and free-living phase, respectively.
conclusionsHR data from the examined wrist-worn trackers were reasonably accurate in both the settings, with the Polar A370 showing stronger agreement with the Polar H10 and smaller errors. Inaccuracies increased with increasing HRs; this was pronounced for Tempo HR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.