Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42884617›Full record

ArticleNutrients2026

Evaluation of a Wearable Hydration Monitor for Estimating Sweat Loss and Hydration Status in Collegiate Athletes: A Pilot Study.

Jill McCann Snyder, Lindsay Toth, Elysse Aguero, Colleen Brennan, Kassandra Duarte

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nutrients, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jill McCann SnyderDepartment of Nutrition and Dietetics, Brooks College of Health, University of North Florida, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA.ORCID 0009-0000-4031-3763
Lindsay TothDepartment of Clinical and Applied Movement Sciences, Brooks College of Health, University of North Florida, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5856-2012
Elysse AgueroDepartment of Nutrition and Dietetics, Brooks College of Health, University of North Florida, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA.
Colleen BrennanDepartment of Nutrition and Dietetics, Brooks College of Health, University of North Florida, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA.
Kassandra DuarteDepartment of Nutrition and Dietetics, Brooks College of Health, University of North Florida, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA.

Funding

Brooks College of Health Pilot Research Grant
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

objectiveInstantaneous, accurate assessment of hydration and sweat loss has potential to optimize athlete performance and reduce risks associated with excessive exercise-related fluid loss. Reusable wearable hydration monitors, such as hDrop monitors, are an emerging non-invasive, quick, and easy to use alternative to existing methods. PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy of the hDrop wearable sweat monitors for estimating sweat loss and hydration status compared to established field-based measures, including body mass change and urine indices.

methodsDivision I male collegiate soccer athletes contributed repeated training-session observations (38 total observations; 18 complete observations for sweat-loss analyses and 36 for hydration-score-USG analyses). They completed training sessions during which pre- and post-exercise body mass, fluid intake, urine output, and urine samples were collected. Sweat loss was calculated using changes in body mass adjusted for fluid balance. hDrop-derived estimates of sweat loss and hydration status were compared to criterion measures using mean bias, percent of criterion, mean absolute percent error (MAPE), repeated-measures Bland-Altman analysis, and generalized estimating equations accounting for observations clustered within athletes. Associations between hydration scores and urine-based markers were assessed using generalized estimating equations accounting for observations clustered within athletes.

resultsThe hDrop generated a sweat-loss estimate for 18 of 38 training-session observations (47.4%). Repeated-measures mean bias for sweat loss was -0.423 L (95% CI -1.106 to 0.259 L). The hDrop estimates averaged 106.2 ± 64.8% of criterion while MAPE was 50.3%, reflecting large individual error. In the repeated-measures analysis, criterion-measured sweat loss was positively associated with hDrop-estimated sweat loss (B = 0.204, 95% CI 0.018 to 0.391,

conclusionsThe hDrop generated sweat-loss estimates in fewer than half of training-session observations and demonstrated substantial individual-level error and significant proportional bias when estimates were available. Although the instantaneous hydration score decreased following exercise, its lack of association with USG leaves its physiological meaning and criterion validity uncertain. These findings do not support use of the hDrop as an interchangeable substitute for established methods of individualized sweat-loss or hydration assessment.

Indexed as

AthletesDehydrationOrganism Hydration StatusSweatingWearable Electronic DevicesAdolescentDrinkingExerciseHumansMaleMonitoring, PhysiologicPilot ProjectsReproducibility of ResultsSoccerSweatWater-Electrolyte Balancehydration assessmentsweat lossvalidity

Identifiers

PMID42884617
PMCPMC13666982

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.