ArticleBMJ open2021
Prospective cohort study to evaluate the accuracy of sleep measurement by consumer-grade smart devices compared with polysomnography in a sleep disorders population.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Performance of consumer wrist-worn sleep tracking devices compared to polysomnography: a meta-analysis.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluation of the Accuracy of Contactless Consumer Sleep-Tracking Devices Application in Human Experiment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Pooled it
- Sleep Promoting Effects of Lettuce (Nutrients · 2025Trial
- Severity of depression and anxiety symptoms is reflected in physiological and behavioral metrics collected from a consumer-grade wearable ring.BMC medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluation of a Contactless Sleep Monitoring Device for Sleep Stage Detection at Home in a Healthy Population: Prospective Study in Free-Living Conditions.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesConsumer-grade smart devices are now commonly used by the public to measure waking activity and sleep. However, the ability of these devices to accurately measure sleep in clinical populations warrants more examination. The aim of the present study was to assess the accuracy of three consumer-grade sleep monitors compared with gold standard polysomnography (PSG).
designA prospective cohort study was performed.
settingAdults undergoing PSG for investigation of a suspected sleep disorder.
participants54 sleep-clinic patients were assessed using three consumer-grade sleep monitors (Jawbone UP3, ResMed S+ and Beddit) in addition to PSG. OUTCOMES: Jawbone UP3, ResMed S+ and Beddit were compared with gold standard in-laboratory PSG on four major sleep parameters-total sleep time (TST), sleep onset latency (SOL), wake after sleep onset (WASO) and sleep efficiency (SE).
resultsThe accelerometer Jawbone UP3 was found to overestimate TST by 28 min (limits of agreement, LOA=-100.23 to 157.37), with reasonable agreement compared with gold standard for TST, WASO and SE. The doppler radar ResMed S+ device underestimated TST by 34 min (LOA=-257.06 to 188.34) and had poor absolute agreement compared with PSG for TST, SOL and SE. The mattress device, Beddit underestimated TST by 53 min (LOA=-238.79 to 132) on average and poor reliability compared with PSG for all measures except TST. High device synchronisation failure occurred, with 20% of recordings incomplete due to Bluetooth drop out and recording loss.
conclusionPoor to moderate agreement was found between PSG and each of the tested devices, however, Jawbone UP3 had relatively better absolute agreement than other devices in sleep measurements compared with PSG. Consumer grade devices assessed do not have strong enough agreement with gold standard measurement to replace clinical evaluation and PSG sleep testing. The models tested here have been superseded and newer models may have increase accuracy and thus potentially powerful patient engagement tools for long-term sleep measurement.
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.