Last Updated on May 30, 2022 by pg@petergamma.org
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0217288
«ECG was recorded via a 64-channel wireless g.Nautilus active electrode multipurpose biosignal acquisition system (g.tec medical engineering GmbH, Austria).
The cap-type g.Nautilus was worn by the participants.»
Here is an example configuration of a 32 channel EEG NAUTILUS MULTI PURPOSE DEVICE wich costs 54`178,78 Euros:
The device used in the above paper was a 64 channel NAUTILUS MULTI PURPOSE DEVICE.
The two Polar H10 chest straps Rob ter Horst PhD used as a reference device for his accuracy tests costs 175 Euros. Rob ter Horst reference device might be cheaper as a Nautilus device, but he invested three years in his tests.
When Rob ter Horst PhD. , a very skilled sports sensor validator, invests three years in test with more than 50 devices, is it not worth it for him to invest also in a high-quality reference device, which also will be accepted by referees of scientific papers? This would be highly desirable.
There are already 23 citations of the paper in PLOS ONE to this date, which was published on May 23, 2019.
Validation of the Polar OH1 sensor with a high quality ECG device seems to be a topic which is of high interest for other researchers which are writing papers. But will the interest in the Polar OH1 continue, if there are so many open questions regarding the Polar OH1 and the Verity Sense?
And will the interest continue, when there are clearly data available, that the Polar OH1 as well as the Polar Verity Sense are no longer the most accurate optical heart rate sensor on the market?
According to Rob ter Horst, PhD. Apple watches are the most accurate optical heat rate sensors he tested. And it seems that Polar made no effort to increase the accuracy of the Polar OH1 successor Verity Sense, but only made efforts to encrease the battery life of the sensor.
Comments are closed.