ReviewTranslational pediatrics2025
Smartwatches in childhood: a mixed blessing?-a scoping review.
Review in Translational pediatrics, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Smartwatches are commonly used within the community, especially amongst its younger population. These devices have a wide range of capabilities, including measuring the heart rate, generating electrocardiographic traces, and issuing alerts when 'abnormal' activity is detected. This information has potential benefits but also potential risks if the health-related measurements lead to inappropriate clinical interventions. This study aimed to evaluate the current literature on the prevalence, perception and interpretation of smartwatches that document and record cardiac information as it impacts on children, adolescents and their parents. Methods: We conducted a scoping review based on the principles of Arksey and O'Malley, which followed the scoping review checklist of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Results: The selection criteria yielded 29 papers. They reported that smartwatch usage in children ranged from 15% to 40%, depending on the country of residence. The number of children presenting with smartwatch-based heart concerns had increased, with many false positives and few true arrhythmia diagnoses. Although there was good accuracy of heart rate measurements, there were poor automated algorithms for heart rhythm classification for the paediatric population. In addition, a few studies reported paediatric smartwatch user anxiety arising from the information generated by the devices. Conclusions: The wearing of smartwatches has increased in children and adolescents. While they are able to record heart rates and provide corresponding electrocardiographic tracings virtually continuously and non-invasively, misinterpretation of the data arising from poor algorithms have led to increased healthcare presentations, as well as child and/or parental concern. There remains a need for ongoing education to understand the variability of the heart rate, especially in children. Furthermore, better algorithms for the interpretation of the information gleaned are required for this relatively well young population, so as to allay the anxiety that may be experienced. The issues related to medicolegal liability, privacy and cybersecurity remain to be resolved.
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.