Rob ter Horst scientifically tested the Samsung Galaxy Fit3 against a Polar H10 chest strap which costs 70 USD:
But are Rob ter Horst’s scientific tests at the highest level? Would it not be better for him to choose a Schiller C200 ECG treadmill for 23 000 USD instead of a Polar H10 chest strap for testing smartwatch accuracy scientifically?
Cardiologist Milind Desai from the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio tested smartwatches as well:
But not on YouTube up to the present day. He wrote a scientific paper in 2019 about smartwatch accuracy as of instance that of the Apple watch 3. Milind Desai used for his test an ECG treadmill which was simiar to the Schiller C200. And they published a paper about smartwatch accuracy tested for runs an a treadmill up to about 15 km/h, tested with a medical grade ECG device, and they published the results in this paper:
Accuracy of commercially available heart rate monitors in athletes: a prospective study
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6732081
But why did they choose only runs up to 15 km/h, and not runs up to maximal speed? Rob ter Horst published a review about ECG devices such as the Schiller Holter ECG, and he sais in the following video review, that ECG devices have accuracy issues if intense activities with strong body movements are investigated:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31004219
The Polar H10 chest strap does not have these accuracy issues. But is it not hard to believe that a chest strap such the Polar H10 which costs 70 USD should be more accurate than for instance a g.Nautilus Multi-Purpose device which costs 50 000 USD?:
A g.tec medical device was used to test the accuracy of the Polar OH1 in the following paper:
Validation of Polar OH1 optical heart rate sensor for moderate and high intensity physical activities
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0217288
Also in this paper a treadmill protocol was used, but they made no tests at high speeds. But why are devices such as the g.Nautilus Multi-Purpose not suitable to investigate intense activities with strong body movements?
We contacted the g.tec medical supports concerning this topic. And they answered, that they do not know of a manufacturer who has solved the problem of ECG motion artifacts.
But what should researchers do now for scientific studies for instance with smartwatches? To choose a Polar H10 chest strap for 70 USD instead of a Schiller ECG treadmill or a device from g.tec? The Polar H10 does not meet the requirements for gold standard for HR measurements which are given in this paper:
Lin LI. A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2532051
And these are:
- A three lead (or 3 channel) ECG device.
- The Mason-Likar electrode placement.
- ECG-based HR has to be determined by visual assessment of a trained research personnel.
The Schiller C200 ECG treadmill as well as the g.tec device fullfill these requirements, but not the Polar H10. But ECG devices have accuracy issues if intense activities with strong body movements are investigated. So what to do now?
The solution is simply not to investigate intense activities with strong body movements at all, as the researcher from the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio have done it the paper about smartwatches published in 2019.
Is the Polar H10 an option for the reseachers of the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio to choose it as a reference to test smartwatch accuracy? Certainly not. Which researchers at the highest level choose test equipement which is not at the highest level? Only Rob ter Horst on YouTube. But his scientific tests are not convincing for us personally.
And as long as no manufacturer has solved the problem of ECG motion artifacts, what else can we do than simply not to investigate intense activities with strong body movements? And if you are on a budget and 23 000 USD for a Schiller C200 ECG treadmill or 50 000 USD for a g.tec medical are too expensive for you personally, you can find instructions on www.petergamma.org how to build more affordable devices by yourself.
And since no one ever was able to convince us personally that smartwatches are suitable for measurements which are published in journals at the highest level, is it not better for scientists not to choose smartwatches for scientific studies at all, and to choose 3 channel ECG devices which are gold standard for heart rate measurements instead?
Information for product sellers who do stock market speculation and scalping with products mentioned by Peter Gamma on www.petergamma.org.
According to the little experience of Peter Gamma from www.petergamma.org, many of the products listed here are still full of issues which need to be resolved. If you do stock market speculation and sculping with those, you will loose Peter Gamma from www.petergamma.org as a buyer of these products and as a reviewer. Is this not risky? Will you not loose a majority of your costumers as well?
And does society in general not accept stock market speculation and scalping with products as those which are listed here? And will you not be politically incapable of finding a majority of the voters if you do stock market speculation and sculping with these products?
And as a consequence will you not be condemned and punished by a political referendum soon? Especially if you do this to a Swiss, since are not majority of Swiss against stock market speculations and sculping with people on a budget? And people in Switzerland are known for a lot of political referendums, since we have direct democracy in this country.
And Peter Gamma from www.petergamma.org will fight up to the European Court of Human Rights against people who do stock market speculation and sculping with the products which are mentioned on www.petergamma.org. And if they do not have yet the legal basis there to do so, he will fight for it.
Comments are closed.