Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36081752›Full record

ArticleDigital health

Accuracy of wrist-worn wearable devices for determining exercise intensity.

Wei-Te Ho, Yi-Jen Yang, Tung-Chou Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

3 authors.

Wei-Te HoDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Cathay General Hospital, Taipei.
Yi-Jen YangOffice of Physical Education, National Pingtung University of Science and Technology.
Tung-Chou LiDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Cathay General Hospital, Taipei.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9979-6990

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: As an indicator of exercise intensity, heart rate can be measured in a timely manner using wrist-worn devices. No study has attempted to estimate a target exercise intensity using wearable devices. The objective of the study was to evaluate the validity of prescribing exercise intensity using wrist-worn devices. Methods: Thirty healthy subjects completed a maximal cardiopulmonary exercise test. Their heart rates were recorded using an electrocardiogram and two devices-Apple Watch Series 6 and Garmin Forerunner 945. Exercise intensity with the target heart rate was defined as resting heart rate + (maximal heart rate - resting heart rate) * Results: Both devices showed a low mean absolute error (1.16-1.48 bpm for Apple and 1.35-2.25 for Garmin) and mean absolute percentage error (<1% for Apple and 1.16-1.39% for Garmin) in all intensities. A substantial correlation with electrocardiogram-measured heart rate was observed for moderate to vigorous intensity with concordance correlation coefficient > 0.95 for both devices, except that Garmin showed moderate correlation at the upper limit of vigorous activity with concordance correlation coefficient = 0.936. Moreover, Bland-Altman plots and scatterplots demonstrated a strong correlation without systematic error when the values obtained via the two devices were compared with electrocardiogram measurements. Conclusions: Our findings indicate the high validity of exercise prescriptions based on the heart rate measured by the two devices. Additional research should explore other populations to confirm these findings.

Indexed as

Apple Watchexercise intensityExercise prescriptionGarmin Forerunnerwearable devices

Identifiers

PMID36081752
PMCPMC9445511

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.