SynthesisJMIR mHealth and uHealth2026
Exploiting Unsupervised Free-Living Data for Cardiorespiratory Fitness Estimation: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2026. 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
Background: Current methods of cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) assessment may discriminate against frail individuals who are challenged to perform a maximal cardiopulmonary exercise test. CRF estimations from free-living wearable data, captured over extended time periods, may offer a more representative assessment and increase usability in clinical settings. Objective: This study aimed to review current evidence behind this novel concept and evaluate the performance and quality of models developed to estimate CRF from free-living, unsupervised data. Methods: Following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, we systematically searched 4 databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and arXiv) for studies reporting the development of models to estimate CRF from continuous free-living wearable data. Studies conducted entirely under controlled laboratory conditions were excluded. Performance metrics were combined in a meta-correlation analysis using a random-effects model and Fisher Z transformation. Results: Of 1848 papers screened, 18 met the eligibility criteria, with a total of 31,072 participants. The weighted mean age was 46.9 (SD 1.46) years. Multiple computational techniques were used, with 8 studies employing more advanced machine learning models. The meta-correlation analysis revealed a pooled overall estimate of 0.83 with a 95% CI 0.77-0.88. The I2 test indicated high heterogeneity at 97%. Risk of bias assessment found most concerns in the data analysis domain, with studies often lacking clarity around the data handling process. Conclusions: A promising preliminary agreement between CRF predictions and measured values was noted. However, no definite conclusions can be drawn for clinical implementation due to high heterogeneity among the included studies and lack of external validation. Nonetheless, continuous data streams appear to be a valuable resource that could lead to a step change in how we measure and monitor CRF.
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.