ArticleInternational journal of exercise science2023
Assessing the Validity of Several Heart Rate Monitors in Wearable Technology While Mountain Biking.
Article in International journal of exercise science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The WEAR-BOT checklist: A risk of bias tool for evaluating validity and reliability research in wearable technology.PloS one · 2026Article
- Validation of Aerobic Capacity (VO2max) and Pulse Oximetry in Wearable Technology.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Wearables for health monitoring: body composition estimates of commercial smartwatch and clinical bioelectrical impedance device.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study sought to assess the validity of several heart rate (HR) monitors in wearable technology during mountain biking (MTB), compared to the Polar H7® HR monitor, used as the criterion device. Methods: A total of 20 participants completed two MTB trials while wearing six HR monitors (5 test devices, 1 criterion). HR was recorded on a second-by-second basis for all devices analyzed. After data processing, validity measures were calculated, including 1. error analysis: mean absolute percentage errors (MAPE), mean absolute error (MAE), and mean error (ME), and 2. Correlation analysis: Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) and Pearson's correlation coefficient ( Results: The only device that was found to be valid during mountain biking was the Suunto Spartan Sport watch with accompanying HR monitor, with a MAPE of 0.66% and a CCC of 0.99 for the overall, combined data. Conclusion: If a person would like to track their HR during mountain biking, for pacing, training, or other reasons, the devices best able to produce valid results are chest-based, wireless electrocardiogram (ECG) monitors, secured by elastic straps to minimize the movement of the device, such as the Suunto chest-based HR monitor.
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.