SynthesisSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Wearable Sensing for Personal Thermal Comfort in the Built Environment: A Systematic Review of the Gap from Sensing to Actuation.
Synthesis in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Wearable sensors enable continuous, non-invasive monitoring of physiological and near-body environmental parameters, offering an occupant-centric alternative for thermal comfort assessment and building control. This systematic review analyses 117 studies (2008-2026) using body-worn sensors, tracing them along a four-stage pipeline: sensing, signal integration, comfort modeling, and building actuation. This reveals a previously unquantified bottleneck: while all 117 studies perform sensing and 83 (71%) integrate physiological and environmental signals, only 52 (44%) build predictive models and just five (4%) reach the building-actuation stage, of which only three implement closed-loop, wearable-informed control. Skin temperature (77 studies, 66%) and heart rate (69, 59%) are the most monitored signals, predominantly at the wrist (70, 60%); multimodal configurations are associated with higher accuracy than single-domain approaches. Machine learning models reach median classification accuracies near 90%, though validation strategy matters: leave-one-subject-out reaches 85% versus 90% for within-subject k-fold. Five structural limitations are identified: small, homogeneous samples (median 16 participants), laboratory-dominated designs (73 studies, 62%), inconsistent validation, limited open data, and unresolved multi-occupant aggregation. The field has learned to measure the occupant but not yet to act on the measurement. Closing this gap requires open benchmark datasets, standardized validation including leave-one-subject-out testing and PMV benchmarking, transfer learning, multi-occupant integration, and inclusive recruitment of vulnerable populations.
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.