ArticleScientific reports2025
Research on the design of smartwatch health information visualization presentation under different motion scenarios.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Comparative Validity of Smartwatch-Derived Heart Rate and Energy Expenditure During Endurance and Resistance Exercise.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Investigating how to adapt smartwatches to meet the distinct needs of users across various motion scenarios, while optimizing visual presentation design to enhance user experience, is an area that deserves thorough exploration. Three experiments were conducted to assess the impact of form, animation, and color on visual presentation. A total of 45 participants took part in each experiment and were divided into three groups. Experiment 1 examined the effect of presentation form using a two-factor mixed design: 2 (presentation form: text, charts, graphs) × 3 (motion scenarios: static, Low-intensity movement, High-intensity movement). Experiment 2 focused on the influence of presentation animation with a two-factor mixed design: 3 (presentation animation: no animation, gradual appearance, geometric morphing) × 3 (motion scenarios: static, Low-intensity movement, High-intensity movement). Experiment 3 investigated the impact of color mode using a two-factor mixed design: 2 (color mode: dark mode, light mode) × 3 (motion scenarios: static, Low-intensity movement, High-intensity movement). Presentation form significantly impacted both cognitive performance and subjective perception, with text being outperformed by charts and graphs. Presentation animation had a notable effect on cognitive performance, with non-animated presentations yielding higher performance scores compared to animations. However, in terms of subjective perception, animated presentations were preferred over non-animated ones. Finally, color mode significantly influenced subjective perception, with dark mode receiving more favorable ratings than light mode. Charts and graphs as a presentation form outperform text in both efficiency and user preference. In terms of information acquisition, non-animated presentations are more efficient than animated ones, although animations score higher in user preference. Additionally, dark mode is more positively evaluated by users compared to light mode.
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.