ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2025
WATCH-PR: Comparison of the Pulse Rate of a WATCH-Type Blood Pressure Monitor with the Pulse Rate of a Conventional Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitor.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMonitoring pulse rate is fundamental to cardiovascular health management and early detection of rhythm disturbances. While oscillometric blood pressure measurement is well established and validated in clinical practice, its use for pulse rate monitoring, particularly via wrist-worn devices, remains largely unexplored.
objectiveThis study investigates whether a smartwatch that performs oscillometric blood pressure measurements at the wrist can also deliver reliable pulse rate readings using the same method.
methodsThis study compared pulse rates recorded by the Omron HeartGuide smartwatch and conventional ambulatory blood pressure monitors in 50 patients over 24 h. Measurements were taken consecutively, and data were analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Bland-Altman plots.
resultsThe study showed a high ICC of 0.971, indicating excellent agreement between devices. The average pulse rate difference was 1.5 bpm, with the Omron HeartGuide reporting slightly lower rates, especially in patients with atrial fibrillation.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates that oscillometric pulse-rate monitoring at the wrist can achieve a high degree of accuracy, comparable to conventional upper-arm devices. Given that oscillometric smartwatches like the Omron HeartGuide are already used for blood pressure monitoring, the findings suggest that they may also be suitable for pulse rate measurement, potentially enhancing their role in telemetric healthcare, but further research is needed, particularly in patients with arrhythmias.
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.