ArticleMayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health2024
Accuracy of Smartwatch Pulse Oximetry Measurements in Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019.
Article in Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health, 2024. 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.
- The Representation of Different Populations in Studies Assessing the Validity of Consumer Wearable Photoplethysmography-Based Measurements: Scoping Review.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Article
- The accuracy of Apple Watch measurements: a living systematic review and meta-analysis.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Ninety years of pulse oximetry: history, current status, and outlook.Journal of biomedical optics · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To assess the ability of 2 commercially available smartwatches to accurately detect clinically significant hypoxia in patients hospitalized with coronavirus-19 (COVID-19). Patients and Methods: A prospective multicenter validation study was performed from November 1, 2021, to August 31, 2022, assessing the Apple Watch Series 7 and Withings ScanWatch inbuilt pulse oximetry, against simultaneous ward-based oximetry as the reference standard. Patients hospitalized with active COVID-19 infection not requiring intensive care admission were recruited. Results: A total of 750 smartwatch pulse oximetry measurements and 400 ward oximetry readings were successfully obtained from 200 patients (male 54%, age 66±18 years). For the detection of clinically significant hypoxia, the Apple Watch had a sensitivity and specificity of 34.8% and 97.5%, respectively with a positive predictive value of 78.1% and negative predictive value of 85.6%. The Withings ScanWatch had a sensitivity and specificity of 68.5% and 80.8%, respectively with a positive predictive value of 44.7% and negative predictive value of 91.9%. The overall accuracy was 84.9% for the Apple Watch and 78.5% for the Withings ScanWatch. The Spearman rank correlation coefficients reported a moderate correlation to ward-based photoplethysmography (Apple: r Conclusion: Although smartwatches are able to provide SpO
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.