ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2025
Finger pulse monitoring is a reliable and valid tool for measuring heart rate during exercise among adolescents in lab and school settings.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA finger pulse monitor (FPM) offers multiple advantages for monitoring heart rate during exercise in comparison to chest worn monitors, including: enhanced testing efficiency; less invasive, particularly for vulnerable populations (e.g. children); and, reduced cost. The purpose of this study was to establish the test-retest reliability of an FPM device for monitoring heart rate during a 3-minute step test (3MST
methodsParticipants (N = 29; male = 16, female = 13; age: 15.8 ± 0.7) completed the 3MST
resultsAbsolute mean differences between devices and settings were clinically insignificant, with the smallest variance at the 1-minute post recording (FPM p = .012; chest strap = 0.041). There were no statistically significant differences in heart rate measurement between settings.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates that finger pulse monitoring is a reliable and valid tool for measuring heart rate during sub-maximal exercise in lab and school 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.