ArticleJMIR formative research2026
Feasibility and Methodological Consideration of Using Wearable Devices to Examine the Relationship Between Sleep and Balance: Case Report With 2 College Students.
Article in JMIR formative research, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Unlabelled: This exploratory case study primarily examined the feasibility of using consumer-grade wearable devices for longitudinal sleep tracking and observed descriptive visual trends between sleep patterns and balance performance. Two college students participated over 4 months. Participant 1 used an Apple Watch Series 5 and an OURA ring; participant 2 used a Fitbit Charge 5 and an OURA ring. Data were collected continuously alongside daily sleep diaries and monthly sensory organization test (SOT) balance assessments. As a primary feasibility outcome, missing data rates were initially high (up to 75.2%) but improved significantly after implementing structured weekly check-ins, dropping to 14.1% and 20.3% for the wrist devices, 9.4% and 25% for the OURA rings, and 0% and 6.25% for the sleep diaries in the optimized phase. Wearables showed varying concordance with sleep diaries for time in bed (TIB), with the Apple Watch showing the least bias (-0.6 min) and the Fitbit and OURA overestimating TIB. While devices showed excellent within-participant agreement for total sleep time (intraclass correlation coefficient=0.97-0.99), agreement was poor for specific sleep stages. Regarding secondary exploratory observations, descriptive visual trends showed that fluctuations in sleep timing and duration coincided with changes in SOT visual subscale scores. In conclusion, consumer wearables are feasible for long-term sleep monitoring when supported by active compliance protocols. While sleep consistency was visually patterned alongside postural stability, these balance findings are strictly exploratory, hypothesis-generating, and not generalizable due to the small sample size and potential practice effects from repeated testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42854191What 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.