ArticleDigital health
Evaluation of the Garmin Vivofit 4 for assessing sleep in youth experiencing sleep disturbances.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Remote Longitudinal Tracking of Sleep, Depression, and Cognition Across Early Adolescence: Protocol for a Longitudinal Observational Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Wearable monitors are increasingly used to assess sleep. However, validity is unknown for certain monitors and populations. We tested the Garmin Vivofit 4 in a pediatric clinical sample. Methods: Participants (n = 25) wore the monitor on their nondominant wrist during an overnight polysomnogram. Garmin and polysomnography were compared using 95% equivalence testing, mean absolute error, and Bland-Altman analysis. Results: On average (mean ± SD), the Garmin predicted later sleep onset (by 0.84 ± 1.60 hours) and earlier sleep offset (by 0.34 ± 0.70 hours) than polysomnography. The resulting difference for total sleep time was -0.55 ± 1.21 hours. Sleep onset latency was higher for Garmin than polysomnography (77.4 ± 100.9 and 22.8 ± 20.0 minutes, respectively), while wake after sleep onset was lower (5.2 ± 9.3 and 43.2 ± 37.9 minutes, respectively). Garmin sleep efficiency averaged 3.3% ± 13.8% lower than polysomnography. Minutes in light sleep and deep sleep (the latter including rapid eye movement) were within ±3.3% of polysomnography (both SDs = 14.9%). No Garmin means were significantly equivalent with polysomnography (adjusted p > 0.99). Mean absolute errors were 0.47 to 0.95 hours for time-based variables (sleep onset, offset, and latency, plus total sleep time and wake after sleep onset), and 8.9% to 21.2% for percentage-based variables (sleep efficiency and sleep staging). Bland-Altman analysis showed systematic bias for wake after sleep onset, but not other variables. Conclusions: The Vivofit 4 showed consistently poor individual-level validity, while group-level validity was better for some variables (total sleep time and sleep efficiency) than others.
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.