ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2023
ChroniSense National Early Warning Score Study: Comparison Study of a Wearable Wrist Device to Measure Vital Signs in Patients Who Are Hospitalized.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Wearable Electronic Monitoring of Vital Signs in Hospitalised Adults: A Nursing Focused Scoping Review of Clinical, Economic and Implementation Outcomes.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Article
- Wearable Devices in Healthcare Beyond the One-Size-Fits All Paradigm.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Overcoming Barriers in the Introduction of Early Warning Scores for Prevention of In-Hospital Cardiac Arrests in Austrian Medical Centers.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Accuracy, intra-, and inter-radiologist variability of PI-RADS v2.1 scoring for clinically significant prostate cancer detection.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Nurses' experiences with inhospital continuous monitoring of vital signs in general wards: A systematic review.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Feasibility study of the use of a wearable vital sign patch in an intensive care unit setting.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2025Article
- Human Factors, Human-Centered Design, and Usability of Sensor-Based Digital Health Technologies: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Pilot study for the development of an automatically generated and wearable-based early warning system for the detection of deterioration of hospitalized patients of an acute care hospital.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2024Article
- A Low-Cost Wearable Device to Estimate Body Temperature Based on Wrist Temperature.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWearable devices could be used to continuously monitor vital signs in patients who are hospitalized, but they require validation.
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the clinical validity of the prototype of a semiautomated wearable wrist device (ChroniSense Polso) to measure vital signs and provide National Early Warning Scores (NEWSs).
methodsVital signs and NEWSs measured using the wearable device were compared with standard, nurse-lead manual measurements. We enrolled adult patients (aged ≥18 years) who required vital sign measurements at least every 6 hours in a UK teaching district general hospital. Wearable device measurements were not used for clinical decision-making. The primary outcome was the agreement on the individual National Early Warning parameter scores and vital sign measurements: respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, body temperature, systolic blood pressure, and heart rate. Secondary outcomes were the agreement on the total NEWS, incidence of adverse events, and user acceptance. To compare the wearable device measurements with the standard measurements, we analyzed vital sign measurements by limits of agreement (Bland-Altman analysis) and conducted κ agreement analyses for NEWSs. A user experience survey was conducted with questions about comfort of the wrist device, safety, preference, and use.
resultsWe included 132 participants in the study, with a mean age of 62 (SD 15.81) years; most of them were men (102/132, 77.3%). The highest weighted κ values were found for heart rate (0.69, 95% CI 0.57-0.81 for all 385 measurements) and systolic blood pressure (0.39, 95% CI 0.30-0.47 for all 339 measurements). Weighted κ values were low for respiration rate (0.03, 95% CI -0.001 to 0.05 for all 445 measurements), temperature (0, 95% CI 0-0 for all 231 measurements), and oxygen saturation (-0.11, 95% CI -0.20 to -0.02 for all 187 measurements). Weighted κ using Cicchetti-Allison weights showed κ of 0.20 (95% CI 0.03-0.38) when using all 56 total NEWSs. The user acceptance survey found that approximately half (45/91, 49%) of the participants found it comfortable to wear the device and liked its appearance. Most (85/92, 92%) of them said that they would wear the device during their next hospital visit, and many (74/92, 80%) said that they would recommend it to others.
conclusionsThis study shows the promising use of a prototype wearable device to measure vital signs in a hospital setting. Agreement between the standard measurements and wearable device measurements was acceptable for systolic blood pressure and heart rate, but needed to be improved for respiration rate, temperature, and oxygen saturation. Future studies need to improve the clinical validity of this wearable device. Large studies are required to assess clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of wearable devices for vital sign measurement. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028219.
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.