Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33411722›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Towards remote monitoring in pediatric care and clinical trials-Tolerability, repeatability and reference values of candidate digital endpoints derived from physical activity, heart rate and sleep in healthy children.

M D Kruizinga, N van der Heide, A Moll, A Zhuparris, Y Yavuz, M L de Kam, F E Stuurman, A F Cohen, G J A Driessen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Treatment of Gaming Disorder in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review.Journal of the Korean Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry · 2025
    Article
  5. Observational
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

M D KruizingaCentre for Human Drug Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2054-2187
N van der HeideCentre for Human Drug Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.
A MollCentre for Human Drug Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.
A ZhuparrisCentre for Human Drug Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Y YavuzCentre for Human Drug Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.
M L de KamCentre for Human Drug Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.
F E StuurmanCentre for Human Drug Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0013-8355
A F CohenCentre for Human Drug Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.
G J A DriessenJuliana Children's Hospital, HAGA Teaching Hospital, The Hague, The Netherlands.
Centre for Human Drug Research · NLLeiden University Medical Center · NLMaastricht University Medical Centre · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDigital devices and wearables allow for the measurement of a wide range of health-related parameters in a non-invasive manner, which may be particularly valuable in pediatrics. Incorporation of such parameters in clinical trials or care as digital endpoint could reduce the burden for children and their parents but requires clinical validation in the target population. This study aims to determine the tolerability, repeatability, and reference values of novel digital endpoints in healthy children.

methodsApparently healthy children (n = 175, 46% male) aged 2-16 were included. Subjects were monitored for 21 days using a home-monitoring platform with several devices (smartwatch, spirometer, thermometer, blood pressure monitor, scales). Endpoints were analyzed with a mixed effects model, assessing variables that explained within- and between-subject variability. Endpoints based on physical activity, heart rate, and sleep-related parameters were included in the analysis. For physical-activity-related endpoints, a sample size needed to detect a 15% increase was calculated.

findingsMedian compliance was 94%. Variability in each physical activity-related candidate endpoint was explained by age, sex, watch wear time, rain duration per day, average ambient temperature, and population density of the city of residence. Estimated sample sizes for candidate endpoints ranged from 33-110 per group. Daytime heart rate, nocturnal heart rate and sleep duration decreased as a function of age and were comparable to reference values published in the literature.

conclusionsWearable- and portable devices are tolerable for pediatric subjects. The raw data, models and reference values presented here can be used to guide further validation and, in the future, clinical trial designs involving the included measures.

Indexed as

AdolescentChildChild, PreschoolExerciseFemaleHeart RateHumansMaleMonitoring, PhysiologicPatient ComplianceReference ValuesReproducibility of ResultsSleepWearable Electronic Devices

Identifiers

PMID33411722
PMCPMC7790377
OpenAlexW3119002388

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.