ArticleFrontiers in physiology2025
Laboratory comparison of consumer-grade and research-established wearables for monitoring heart rate, body temperature, and physical acitivity in sub-Saharan Africa.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2025. 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.
- Wearable Sensors for Health Monitoring.Biosensors · 2026Review
- Impact of central adiposity on the heart rate and calorie estimation accuracy of diverse smartwatches and the resulting subjective exercise experience.Frontiers in sports and active living · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Consumer-grade wearables are becoming increasingly popular in research and in clinical contexts. These technologies hold significant promise for advancing digital medicine, particularly in remote and rural areas in low-income settings like sub-Saharan Africa, where climate change is exacerbating health risks. This study evaluates the data agreement between consumer-grade and research-established devices under standardized conditions. Methods: Twenty-two participants (11 women, 11 men) performed a structured protocol, consisting of six different activity phases (sitting, standing, and the first four stages of the classic Bruce treadmill test). We collected heart rate, (core) body temperature, step count, and energy expenditure. Each variable was simultaneously tracked by consumer-grade and established research-grade devices to evaluate the validity of the consumer-grade devices. We statistically compared the data agreement using Pearson's correlation Results: A good agreement was found between the wrist-worn Withings Pulse HR (consumer-grade) and the chest-worn Faros Bittium 180 in measuring heart rate while sitting, standing, and slow walking on a treadmill at a speed of 2.7 km/h ( Conclusion: The Withings device showed adequate performance for heart rate at low activity levels and step count at higher activity levels, but had limited overall accuracy. The Tucky device showed poor agreement with the Tcore in all six different activity phases. The limited accuracy of consumer-grade devices suggests caution in their use for rigorous research, but points to their potential utility in capture general physiological trends in long-term field monitoring or population-health surveillance.
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.