Last Updated on April 8, 2024 by pg@petergamma.org
After DC Rainmaker who reviewed over many years consumer grade monitors, and again and again talked about their high accuracy:
DC Rainmaker about the Verity Sense:
Read there the discussion between DC Rainmaker and Peter Gamma from www.petergamma.org about the Polar Verity Sense firmware update, which made Peter Gamma from www.petergamma.org retreat from discussions with DC Rainmaker and the Verity Sense:
https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2021/02/polar-verity-sense-optical-hr-sensor-band-in-depth-review.html
And now Rob ter Horst follows DC Rainmaker. Since Peter Gamma from www.petergamma.org wrote his review about consumer grade heart rate monitors which he published on 6. June 2022 on www.petergamma.org:
A review which gives a very negative result about the quality of these scientific accuracy validation papers, we basically find only acccuracy validation data about consumer grade heart rate monitors on YouTube from Rob ter Horst with his Polar H10 chest strap as a reference device:
Rob ter Hors who want to make us believe that the Polar H10 chest strap is a gold standard heart rate monitor in research. This is hard to believe.
Since Rob ter Horst has an income from advertising revenues, can we not say that he is partly funded by sports watch companies such as Polar and therefore has a conflict of interest?
By experience Peter Gamma from www.petergamma.org knows that only view people are performing accuracy studies about consumer grade monitors which are published in scientific journals. But did consumer HRM testers over years like DC Rainmaker not send us the message that consumer grade heart rate monitors have become very acccurate and become more accurate each year?
This was the cause that Peter Gamma from www.petergamma.org wanted to know how accurate they really are scientifically. But the closer he was looking for these data, the less he find those. Do sports sensor manufacturer try to again and again to manipulate costumers and make them believe that sports sensors are highly accurate?
Previously it was DC Rainmaker who made us believe that sports sensors are highly accurate. And now Rob ter Horst makes us believe that sports sensors are highly accurate.
But Rob ter Horst misses a scientific proof of his statemement with numerical and statistical data published in scientific papers about his more than 100 PPG watches.
Peter Gamma from www.petergamma.org does not accept Rob ter Horst’s claims that the Polar H10 is a gold standard heart rate monitor in research, since the Polar H10 does not meet the requirements of gold standard for heart rate measurements. The reqirements for gold standard or heart rate measurements are described in this paper:
A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2720055
And these requirements 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.
This paper has been cited 8716 times to this date.
On the contrast the paper:
RR interval signal quality of a heart rate monitor and an ECG Holter at rest and during exercise:
This is the paper Rob ter Horst uses as a scientific justification which should proof the high accuracy of his Polar H10 reference chest strap. It has been only cited 326 times to this date on google scholar.
326 citations compared to 8716 citations, does this not say something about the impact these two scientific papers?
And Rob ter Horst can test 200 PPG watches on his YouTube channels against the Polar H10 chest strap, which does not meet these gold standard requirements, this makes the PPG watches he tests not more accurate than they where before. And which scientists use PPG heart rate monitors for scientific studies? And even if Rob ter Horst tests 300 PPG watches on his YouTube channel, does this change anything about the facts Peter Gamma from www.petergamma.org has published here on WordPress?
Rob ter Horst is a post-doctoral researcher from Vienna, Austria who is specialized in biological data analysis who want to make us believe that consumer grade HRMs are highly accurate. But he still misses a proof for his statements published in scientific papers about the accuracy of his more than 100 smartwatches. But who has time to test more than 100 smartwatches and write scientific papers about those? And who as a Schiller C200 ECG treadmill for 23 000 USD as a reference device to test smartwatch accuracy scientifically, a device from which nobody dares to toubt about it’s accuracy?