ArticleJMIR biomedical engineering2024
Validation of a Wearable Sensor Prototype for Measuring Heart Rate to Prescribe Physical Activity: Cross-Sectional Exploratory Study.
Article in JMIR biomedical engineering, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Short-Term Effects of Visceral Manual Therapy on Autonomic Nervous System Modulation in Individuals with Clinically Based Bruxism: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
- Wrist-Worn and Arm-Worn Wearables for Monitoring Heart Rate During Sedentary and Light-to-Vigorous Physical Activities: Device Validation Study.JMIR cardio · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWearable sensors are rapidly evolving, particularly in health care, due to their ability to facilitate continuous or on-demand physiological monitoring.
objectiveThis study aimed to design and validate a wearable sensor prototype incorporating photoplethysmography (PPG) and long-range wide area network technology for heart rate (HR) measurement during a functional test.
methodsWe conducted a transversal exploratory study involving 20 healthy participants aged between 20 and 30 years without contraindications for physical exercise. Initially, our laboratory developed a pulse wearable sensor prototype for HR monitoring. Following this, the participants were instructed to perform the Incremental Shuttle Walk Test while wearing the Polar H10 HR chest strap sensor (the reference for HR measurement) and the wearable sensor. This test allowed for real-time comparison of HR responses between the 2 devices. Agreement between these measurements was determined using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC
resultsThe mean differences between the Polar H10 and the wearable sensor during the test were -2.6 (95% CI -3.5 to -1.8) for rest HR, -4.1 (95% CI -5.3 to -3) for maximum HR, -2.4 (95% CI -3.5 to -1.4) for mean test HR, and -2.5 (95% CI -3.6 to -1.5) for mean recovery HR. The mean absolute percentage errors were -3% for rest HR, -2.2% for maximum HR, -1.8% for mean test HR, and -1.6% for recovery HR. Excellent agreement was observed between the Polar H10 and the wearable sensor for rest HR (ICC
conclusionsThe pulse-wearable sensor prototype tested in this study proves to be a valid tool for monitoring HR at rest, during functional tests, and during recovery compared with the Polar H10 reference device used in the laboratory setting.
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.