SynthesisJournal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine2025
Performance of consumer wrist-worn sleep tracking devices compared to polysomnography: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Role of Digital Biomarkers in Physiological Signal-Based Depression Assessment: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Associations between weather variables and sleep architecture: A large-scale analysis using consumer sleep data.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2026Article
- Advancing Neurorehabilitation and Recovery Through Human Movement Quantification via Wearable Sensing.Neurorehabilitation and neural repair · 2026Article
- Wearable Sleep and Circadian Monitoring in Intensive Care Nursing: A Scoping Review.Nursing in critical care · 2026Article
- Light exposure and sleep architecture in real-world settings.Npj biological timing and sleep · 2026Article
- Role of the Pharmacist in Supporting the Use of Connected Health Devices: Example of Connected Watches.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Weight and sleep health in OSA: exploring their link.Frontiers in sleep · 2026Article
- A double-blind, placebo-controlled investigation of the acute effects of Essence ring aromatherapy on sleep using actigraphy.Sleep and biological rhythms · 2026Article
- Detection of cortical arousals in sleep using multimodal wearable sensors and machine learning.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Contextual equivalence for accurate comparison of wearables requires transparency.Physiological reports · 2025Article
- Sleep Compensation on Work-Free days Is Associated with Better Sleep Quality.Nature and science of sleep · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
objectivesThe use of sleep tracking devices is increasing as people become more aware of the importance of sleep and interested in monitoring their patterns. With many devices on the market, we conducted a meta-analysis comparing sleep scoring data from consumer wrist-worn sleep tracking devices with polysomnography to validate the accuracy of these devices.
methodsWe retrieved studies from the databases of SCOPUS, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, and KoreaMed and OVID Medline up to March 2024. We compared personal data about participants and information on objective sleep parameters.
resultsFrom 24 studies, data of 798 patient using Fitbit, Jawbone, myCadian watch, WHOOP strap, Garmin, Basis B1, Zulu Watch, Huami Arc, E4 wristband, Fatigue Science Readiband, Apple Watch, or Xiaomi Mi Band 5 were analyzed. There were significant differences in total sleep time (mean difference, -16.854; 95% confidence interval, [-26.332; -7.375]), sleep efficiency (mean difference, -4.691; 95% confidence interval, [-7.079; -2.302]), sleep latency (mean difference, 2.574; 95% confidence interval, [0.606; 4.542]), and wake after sleep onset (mean difference, 13.255; 95% confidence interval, [4.522; 21.988]) between all consumer sleep tracking devices and polysomnography. In subgroup analysis, there was no significant difference in wake after sleep onset between Fitbit and polysomnography. There was also no significant difference in sleep latency between other devices and polysomnography. Fitbit measured sleep latency longer than other devices, and other devices measured wake after sleep onset longer. Based on Begg and Egger's test, there was no publication bias in total sleep time and sleep efficiency.
conclusionsWrist-worn sleep tracking devices, although popular, are not as reliable as polysomnography in measuring key sleep parameters such as total sleep time, sleep efficiency, and sleep latency. Physicians and consumers should be aware of their limitations and interpret results carefully, though they can still be useful for tracking general sleep patterns. Further improvements and clinical studies are needed to enhance their accuracy. CITATION: Lee YJ, Lee JY, Cho JH, Kang YJ, Choi JH. Performance of consumer wrist-worn sleep tracking devices compared to polysomnography: a meta-analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.