ReviewDigital biomarkers
EVIDENCE Publication Checklist for Studies Evaluating Connected Sensor Technologies: Explanation and Elaboration.
Review in Digital biomarkers. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Digital Devices for Assessing Motor Functions in Mobility-Impaired and Healthy Populations: Systematic Literature Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Pooled it
- Recommendations for Defining and Reporting Adherence Measured by Biometric Monitoring Technologies: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Pooled it
- Women's Health Wearables: From Continuous Signals to Actionable Digital Phenotypes Across the Reproductive Lifespan.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Heart Rate Variability in Congenital Heart Disease and Controls Using Wearable Technology and a Health Application Programming Interface-A Cross-sectional Study.CJC pediatric and congenital heart disease · 2026Article
- Advancing digital sensing in mental health research.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Review
- Human Factors, Human-Centered Design, and Usability of Sensor-Based Digital Health Technologies: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Quantitative Gait and Balance Outcomes for Ataxia Trials: Consensus Recommendations by the Ataxia Global Initiative Working Group on Digital-Motor Biomarkers.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2024Review
- Article
- Rigorous and rapid evidence assessment in digital health with the evidence DEFINED framework.NPJ digital medicine · 2023Review
- Feasibility and usability of a digital health technology system to monitor mobility and assess medication adherence in mild-to-moderate Parkinson's disease.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Article
- Neuromechanical Biomarkers for Robotic Neurorehabilitation.Frontiers in neurorobotics · 2021Review
- Review
- Considerations for Analyzing and Interpreting Data from Biometric Monitoring Technologies in Clinical Trials.Digital biomarkersReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The EVIDENCE (EValuatIng connecteD sENsor teChnologiEs) checklist was developed by a multidisciplinary group of content experts convened by the Digital Medicine Society, representing the clinical sciences, data management, technology development, and biostatistics. The aim of EVIDENCE is to promote high quality reporting in studies where the primary objective is an evaluation of a digital measurement product or its constituent parts. Here we use the terms digital measurement product and connected sensor technology interchangeably to refer to tools that process data captured by mobile sensors using algorithms to generate measures of behavioral and/or physiological function. EVIDENCE is applicable to 5 types of evaluations: (1) proof of concept; (2) verification, (3) analytical validation, and (4) clinical validation as defined by the V3 framework; and (5) utility and usability assessments. Using EVIDENCE, those preparing, reading, or reviewing studies evaluating digital measurement products will be better equipped to distinguish necessary reporting requirements to drive high-quality research. With broad adoption, the EVIDENCE checklist will serve as a much-needed guide to raise the bar for quality reporting in published literature evaluating digital measurements products.
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.