Apple watch accuracy in monitoring health metrics: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q3 BIOPHYSICS
Ju-Pil Choe, Minsoo Kang
{"title":"Apple watch accuracy in monitoring health metrics: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Ju-Pil Choe, Minsoo Kang","doi":"10.1088/1361-6579/adca82","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Wearable technology like the Apple Watch is increasingly important for monitoring health metrics. Accurate measurement is crucial, as inaccuracies can impact health outcomes. Despite extensive research, findings on the Apple Watch's accuracy vary across different conditions. While previous reviews have summarized findings, few have utilized a meta-analytic approach. This study aims to quantitatively evaluate the accuracy of the Apple Watch in measuring health metrics. The accuracy of the Apple Watch was assessed in measuring energy expenditure (EE), heart rate (HR), and step counts (steps). We searched Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus for studies on adults using the Apple Watch compared to reference measures. The Bland-Altman framework was applied to assess mean bias and limits of agreement (LoA), with robust variance estimation to address within-study correlations. Heterogeneity was assessed across variables such as age, health status, device series, activity intensity, and activity type. Additionally, the mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) reported in the included studies was summarized by subgroups. This review included 56 studies, comprising 270 effect sizes on EE (71), HR (148), and steps (51). The meta-analysis showed a mean bias of 0.30 (LoA: -2.09 to 2.69) for EE (kcal/min), -0.12 (LoA: -11.06 to 10.81) for HR (beats/min), -1.83 (LoA: -9.08 to 5.41) for steps (steps /min). The forest plots showed variability in LoA across subgroups. For MAPE, all subgroups for EE exceeded the 10% validity threshold, while none of the subgroups for HR exceeded this threshold. For steps, some subgroups exceeded 10%, highlighting variability in accuracy based on different conditions. This study demonstrates that while the Apple Watch generally provides accurate HR and step measurements, its accuracy for EE is limited. Although HR and step measurements showed acceptable accuracy, variability was observed across different user characteristics and measurement conditions. These findings highlight the importance of considering such factors when evaluating validity.</p>","PeriodicalId":20047,"journal":{"name":"Physiological measurement","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physiological measurement","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6579/adca82","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Wearable technology like the Apple Watch is increasingly important for monitoring health metrics. Accurate measurement is crucial, as inaccuracies can impact health outcomes. Despite extensive research, findings on the Apple Watch's accuracy vary across different conditions. While previous reviews have summarized findings, few have utilized a meta-analytic approach. This study aims to quantitatively evaluate the accuracy of the Apple Watch in measuring health metrics. The accuracy of the Apple Watch was assessed in measuring energy expenditure (EE), heart rate (HR), and step counts (steps). We searched Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus for studies on adults using the Apple Watch compared to reference measures. The Bland-Altman framework was applied to assess mean bias and limits of agreement (LoA), with robust variance estimation to address within-study correlations. Heterogeneity was assessed across variables such as age, health status, device series, activity intensity, and activity type. Additionally, the mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) reported in the included studies was summarized by subgroups. This review included 56 studies, comprising 270 effect sizes on EE (71), HR (148), and steps (51). The meta-analysis showed a mean bias of 0.30 (LoA: -2.09 to 2.69) for EE (kcal/min), -0.12 (LoA: -11.06 to 10.81) for HR (beats/min), -1.83 (LoA: -9.08 to 5.41) for steps (steps /min). The forest plots showed variability in LoA across subgroups. For MAPE, all subgroups for EE exceeded the 10% validity threshold, while none of the subgroups for HR exceeded this threshold. For steps, some subgroups exceeded 10%, highlighting variability in accuracy based on different conditions. This study demonstrates that while the Apple Watch generally provides accurate HR and step measurements, its accuracy for EE is limited. Although HR and step measurements showed acceptable accuracy, variability was observed across different user characteristics and measurement conditions. These findings highlight the importance of considering such factors when evaluating validity.

苹果手表监测健康指标的准确性:系统回顾与荟萃分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Physiological measurement
Physiological measurement 生物-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
9.40%
发文量
124
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Physiological Measurement publishes papers about the quantitative assessment and visualization of physiological function in clinical research and practice, with an emphasis on the development of new methods of measurement and their validation. Papers are published on topics including: applied physiology in illness and health electrical bioimpedance, optical and acoustic measurement techniques advanced methods of time series and other data analysis biomedical and clinical engineering in-patient and ambulatory monitoring point-of-care technologies novel clinical measurements of cardiovascular, neurological, and musculoskeletal systems. measurements in molecular, cellular and organ physiology and electrophysiology physiological modeling and simulation novel biomedical sensors, instruments, devices and systems measurement standards and guidelines.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信