ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2020
Clinical evaluation and diagnostic yield following evaluation of abnormal pulse detected using Apple Watch.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
37 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.
- Arrhythmias Beyond Atrial Fibrillation Detection Using Smartwatches: A Systematic Review.Anatolian journal of cardiology · 2023Pooled it
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Smartwatches for the Detection of Cardiac Arrhythmia: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- From wrist to heart: clinical validation and real-world translation of wearable and portable AI-enhanced electrocardiography.European heart journal. Digital health · 2026Review
- Precision prevention and the temporal disruption of evidence: the case of heart rate notifications from wearables.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2026Article
- Is artificial intelligence a friend or foe to epidemiology?Annals of epidemiology · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence-Driven Wearable and Connected Technology for Allergy: Real-Time Monitoring and Predictive Management for Personalized Care.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice · 2025Review
- Approach to the Postmarket Evaluation of Consumer Wearable Technologies.JAMA cardiology · 2025Article
- The illusion of safety: A report to the FDA on AI healthcare product approvals.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Individualized prediction of atrial fibrillation onset risk based on lifelogs.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2025Article
- Pulse rate variability is not the same as heart rate variability: findings from a large, diverse clinical population study.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Article
- Wearables and Atrial Fibrillation: Advances in Detection, Clinical Impact, Ethical Concerns, and Future Perspectives.Cureus · 2025Review
- Detection of Arrhythmias Using Smartwatches-A Systematic Literature Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Wearable health monitoring: wave of the future or waste of time?Global cardiology science & practice · 2024Review
- Scalable Approach to Consumer Wearable Postmarket Surveillance: Development and Validation Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2024Article
- Use of Artificial Intelligence in Improving Outcomes in Heart Disease: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation · 2024Review
- Article
- Artificial intelligence-enabled atrial fibrillation detection using smartwatches: current status and future perspectives.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Telemedicine and the assessment of clinician time: a scoping review.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe study sought to characterize the evaluation of patients who present following detection of an abnormal pulse using Apple Watch. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe conducted a retrospective review of patients evaluated for abnormal pulse detected using Apple Watch over a 4-month period.
resultsAmong 264 included patients, clinical documentation for 41 (15.5%) explicitly noted an abnormal pulse alert. Preexisting atrial fibrillation was noted in 58 (22.0%). Most commonly performed testing included 12-lead echocardiography (n = 158; 59.8%), Holter monitor (n = 77; 29.2%), and chest x-ray (n = 64; 24.2%). A clinically actionable cardiovascular diagnosis of interest was established in only 30 (11.4%) patients, including 6 of 41 (15%) patients who received an explicit alert. DISCUSSION: False positive screening results may lead to overutilization of healthcare resources.
conclusionsThe Food and Drug Administration and Apple should consider the unintended consequences of widespread screening for asymptomatic ("silent") atrial fibrillation and use of the Apple Watch abnormal pulse detection functionality by populations in whom the device has not been adequately studied.
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.