ArticleBiosensors2023
Wearable Electrocardiography for Physical Activity Monitoring: Definition of Validation Protocol and Automatic Classification.
Article in Biosensors, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Representation of Different Populations in Studies Assessing the Validity of Consumer Wearable Photoplethysmography-Based Measurements: Scoping Review.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Article
- A Hybrid CNN-SVM Approach for ECG-Based Multi-Class Differential Diagnosis of PTSD, Depression, and Panic Attack.Biosensors · 2026Article
- Conventional Training Integrated with SteamVR Tracking 2.0: Body Stability and Coordination Training Evaluation on ICAROS Pro.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Signal Quality in Continuous Transcutaneous Bilirubinometry.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Wearable ECG Device and Machine Learning for Heart Monitoring.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Biosensor-Based Multimodal Deep Human Locomotion Decoding via Internet of Healthcare Things.Micromachines · 2023Article
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
Wearable devices are rapidly spreading thanks to multiple advantages. Their use is expanding in several fields, from medicine to personal assessment and sport applications. At present, more and more wearable devices acquire an electrocardiographic (ECG) signal (in correspondence to the wrist), providing potentially useful information from a diagnostic point of view, particularly in sport medicine and in rehabilitation fields. They are remarkably relevant, being perceived as a common watch and, hence, considered neither intrusive nor a cause of the so-called "white coat effect". Their validation and metrological characterization are fundamental; hence, this work aims at defining a validation protocol tested on a commercial smartwatch (Samsung Galaxy Watch3, Samsung Electronics Italia S.p.A., Milan, Italy) with respect to a gold standard device (Zephyr BioHarness 3.0, Zephyr Technology Corporation, Annapolis, MD, USA, accuracy of ±1 bpm), reporting results on 30 subjects. The metrological performance is provided, supporting final users to properly interpret the results. Moreover, machine learning and deep learning models are used to discriminate between resting and activity-related ECG signals. The results confirm the possibility of using heart rate data from wearable sensors for activity identification (best results obtained by Random Forest, with accuracy of 0.81, recall of 0.80, and precision of 0.81, even using ECG signals of limited duration, i.e., 30 s). Moreover, the effectiveness of the proposed validation protocol to evaluate measurement accuracy and precision in a wide measurement range is verified. A bias of -1 bpm and an experimental standard deviation of 11 bpm (corresponding to an experimental standard deviation of the mean of ≈0 bpm) were found for the Samsung Galaxy Watch3, indicating a good performance from a metrological point of view.
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.