ArticleJMIR cardio2025
Validity of Heart Rate Measurement Using Wearable Devices During Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing in Patients With Cardiovascular Disease: Prospective Pilot Validation Study.
Article in JMIR cardio, 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.
- Artificial Intelligence in Cardiovascular Medicine: A Giant Step in Personalized Medicine?Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Wearable devices offer a promising solution for remotely monitoring heart rate (HR) during home-based cardiac rehabilitation. However, evidence regarding their accuracy across varying exercise intensities and patient profiles remains limited, particularly in populations with cardiovascular disease (CVD) such as those with heart failure (HF). Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of HR measurements obtained using the Fitbit Inspire 3 during cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPX) in patients with CVD, including those with HF. Methods: In this single-center, prospective pilot study, we enrolled 30 patients with CVD undergoing CPX. HR was simultaneously recorded using electrocardiography and the Fitbit Inspire 3 at 1-minute intervals across various CPX phases: rest, exercise below and above the anaerobic threshold (AT), and recovery. The correlation between the two methods was assessed using the Pearson correlation coefficient. Measurement error was quantified by mean absolute error and mean absolute percentage error (MAPE), with a MAPE of ≤10% defined as the threshold for acceptable agreement. Results: All data points were 630 points per minute. The Fitbit Inspire 3 device demonstrated a strong overall correlation with electrocardiography-derived HR (r=0.90; IQR 0.88-0.91) and an acceptable MAPE of 5.40% (SD 8.33%). The total error was 14.9% (94/630), with overestimation and underestimation of 37 (5.8%) points and 57 (9%) points, respectively. The rate of HR underestimation reached 19 (16%) points during exercise above the AT, compared to 1 (3%) point at rest. When stratified by HF stage (B vs C), underestimation was more pronounced in patients with HF (14/275, 5% points vs 40/355, 11.2% points). Conclusions: The Fitbit Inspire 3 provides acceptable validity for HR monitoring during CPX in patients with CVD. However, clinicians should interpret HR data with caution during high-intensity exercise, especially in patients with HF.
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.