ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Can a Commercially Available Smartwatch Device Accurately Measure Nighttime Sleep Outcomes in Individuals with Knee Osteoarthritis and Comorbid Insomnia? A Comparison with Home-Based Polysomnography.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
Sleep is a vital physiological process for recovery and health. In people with knee osteoarthritis (OA), disrupted sleep is common and linked to worse clinical outcomes. Commercial sleep trackers provide an accessible option to monitor sleep in this population, but their accuracy for detecting sleep, wake, and sleep stages remains uncertain. This study compared nighttime sleep data from polysomnography (PSG) and Fitbit Sense in individuals with knee OA and insomnia. Data were collected from 53 participants (60.4% women, mean age 51 ± 8.2 years) over 62 nights using simultaneous PSG and Fitbit recording. Fitbit Sense showed high accuracy (85.76%) and sensitivity (95.95%) for detecting sleep but lower specificity (50.96%), indicating difficulty separating quiet wakefulness from sleep. Agreement with PSG was higher on nights with longer total sleep time, higher sleep efficiency, shorter sleep onset, and fewer awakenings, suggesting better performance when sleep is less fragmented. The device showed limited precision in classifying sleep stages, often misclassifying deep and REM sleep as light sleep. Despite these issues, Fitbit Sense may serve as a useful complementary tool for monitoring sleep duration, timing, and regularity in this population. However, sleep stage and fragmentation data should be interpreted cautiously in both clinical and research settings.
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.