Rob ter Horst’s main reference device is the Polar H10 which is scientically validated in a validation paper which was partly funded by Polar:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31004219
He is post-doctoral researcher from the CeMM Research Center for Molecular Medicine of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna and is specialized in biological data analysis,
and does scientific studies about consumer grade HRMS. Next to this, he continues to publish scientific papers:
https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=de&user=o6avANkAAAAJ&view_op=list_works&sortby=pubdate
But are these about smartwatches? After we looked several times at these papers, we sah only one paper from Rob ter Horst about smartwatches, in this paper is about wearable technology:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ejn.16227
And next to his job post-doctoral researcher from the CeMM Research Center for Molecular Medicine of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, he tested the accuracy of over 100 smartwatches as a self-employed YouTube video maker:
But is to test more than 100 smartwatches not almost a full-time job? And who can make a living from testing the accuracy of smartwatches? So how is Rob funded for these smartwatch tests? And does Rob receive smartwatches for free in exchange for a review, as this often happens with YouTube videomakers? YouTube videomaker leepspvideo for instance reports in many of his videos, that he received devices in exchange for a review. But is Rob ter Horst as transparent as leepspvideo?
Scientific papers about consumer grade HRMs with transparent funding which are not funded by sports whatch companies are listed here:
Are these not the scientific papers about consumer grade HRM accuracy which are at the highest level? But all of these scientists stopped testing after 2019 which has also been discussed here:
And the paper about smartwaches which was at the highest level for us personally was the paper which was published in Nature Reviews Cardiology:
“The Apple Watch can detect atrial fibrillation: so what now?”
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41569-019-0330-y
And the paper is summarized with the following words:
«The Apple Heart Study demonstrates that the Apple Watch can detect atrial fibrillation inferred from the smartwatch heart-rate sensor with a high positive predictive value. However, we must now contend with many clinically relevant unknowns that were not addressed by the study, such as the ramifications of a false-positive result.»
Are there more applications than atrial fibrillation which would make those interesting for scientists?
And wo is interested in the other 99 smartwatches Rob ter Horst tested scientifically on YouTube? The people who fund him? And who are they? And are among those sports watch companies? What is your opinion about this topic? Write it in the comments below.
Did not all of the scientists who did smartwatch accuracy testing in scientific papers stop testing smartwatches after the year 2019. But would those authors not have continued their smartwatch accuracy testing, if their results about those would have been positive?
And would they not be leading scientific smartwatch accuracy testers on the hole world, if they would continue their work? But are there any new papers about smartwatches which would be worth mentioning which where published after 2019? We know of none.
And would the researchers who wrote scientific papers about smartwatches not have continued their scientific studies, if new and better smartwaches where on the market, as the ones they already have tested? But we do know of such revolutionary new smartwatches as well as new revolutionary scientific papers about smartwatches.