Last Updated on August 26, 2023 by pg@petergamma.org
The accuracy values in this table are from different papers using different testing protocols and different testing methods, and therefore they cannot be compared directly. We listed those all the same, to be be able to compare the values from different papers. It can also be helpful to see if it worth to do studies with multiple sensors in one paper with one method. Such papers are hardly available.
| Heart rate monitor | Accuracy (min) | Reference device | Paper |
| Polar OH1 | 93.99 | Polar H10 | [90.9.1] |
| Polar OH1 | 95,00 | g.Nautilus ECG | [90.8.6] |
| Polar OH1 | 95.00 | Polar H10 | [90.9.3] |
| Apple Watch 1 | 92,00 | Quinton Q-tel RMS | [90.8.3] |
| Apple Watch 6 | > 95,00 | Polar H10 | [90.9.2] |
| Apple Watch 3 | 96,00 | QuintonQ-tel RMS | [90.8.5] |
| Apple Watch 1 | 98,40 | Vyntus ECG | [90.8.4] |
| Polar H7 | 98,00 | Quinton Q-tel RMS | [90.8.5] |
| Polar H7 | 99,60 | Quinton Q-tel RMS | [90.8.3] |
| Polar H10 | 99.63 | Signal Quality | [90.10.1] |
- Whe do not know of any scientific study which directly compares the accuracy of the Polar H7 to the Polar H10.
- We do not know of a scientific study which compares the accuracy of the Polar H10 to a 3 lead gold standard ECG device on a threadmill with speeds below 15 km/h. We suppose that ECG movement artefacts do not cause problems at speeds up to 15 km/h.
- There is only one paper which compares the Polar H7 to a 3 lead (or channel) ECG device on a treadmill with speeds up to 15km / h [90.8.5].
Comments are closed.