ArticleFrontiers in physiology2025
An observational study of the reliability and concurrent validity of heart rate variability devices in athletes.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Accuracy of Photoplethysmography-Derived Pulse Rate Variability Compared with Electrocardiography-Derived Heart Rate Variability: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
- Mobile Health (mHealth) Apps in Sport Training: A Scoping Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Temporal dissociation between heart rate recovery and heart rate variability recovery after submaximal exercise in healthy older adults.European review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity · 2026Article
- Exercise Training and Heart Rate Variability: A Guided Optimization of Cardiorespiratory Fitness in Cardiometabolic Disease.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2026Review
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
Background: Heart rate variability (HRV) is a non-invasive indicator of autonomic nervous system function and is increasingly used in athlete monitoring. While electrocardiography (ECG) is the gold standard for HRV measurement, its use is limited in field settings. Objective: To evaluate the intra-session reliability and concurrent validity of a smartphone-based PPG app for HRV measurement in athletes, compared to a Polar H10 chest strap and ECG. Methods: This observational study included 37 trained participants (17 female; mean age 21.95 ± 3.69 years). HRV was recorded concurrently via ECG, Polar H10 chest strap, and the CameraHRV smartphone app in two repeated trials on the same day. Data were processed using device-specific software. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC), coefficient of variation (CV%), mean absolute percentage error (MAPE), and Bland-Altman plots were used to assess reliability and agreement. Results: All three devices showed good-to-excellent intra-session reliability for RMSSD (ICC range 0.83-0.90) and pNN50 (ICC range 0.87-0.92). The Polar chest strap had the highest consistency and lowest error compared to ECG (RMSSD MAPE: 2.16%). The PPG app also demonstrated strong validity (RMSSD MAPE: 17.49%) but wider limits of agreement. Conclusion: Both the Polar chest strap and smartphone PPG app demonstrated acceptable reliability and validity for short-duration HRV assessment in athletes. While the chest strap outperformed the PPG app in precision, the PPG app may offers a practical, low-cost alternative for athlete monitoring.
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.