ArticlePLOS digital health2026
Can consumer wearables support outpatient health monitoring for patients with post-acute infection syndromes? A systematic umbrella review of accuracy, validity, and clinical utility data.
Article in PLOS digital health, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An estimated 65 million individuals around the world have experienced Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC or Long COVID) and an additional 17-24 million are living with other post-acute infection syndromes. Current frontline treatment recommendations for these heterogenous, multisystemic conditions emphasize self-monitoring and non-progressive rehabilitation of activity and exertion. Consumer health wearables can potentially support symptom, activity, and exertion tracking; however, the strength of the scientific evidence supporting their use in this context is unclear. This pre-registered systematic umbrella review aimed to address this gap by synthesizing review-level evidence for the accuracy, validity, and clinical utility of consumer wearable-assessed biometrics relevant to PASC and related syndromes. Following PRISMA guidelines, 3,988 records were screened, with 42 reviews meeting inclusion criteria spanning more than 30 brands and over 150 distinct device series. This umbrella review characterized quality and risk of bias, synthesized and evaluated accuracy evidence for 17 biometrics, and evaluated clinical utility outcomes. Findings revealed highly variable review quality; substantial heterogeneity in device performance across biometrics, populations, and settings; and limited evidence for clinical utility. Two biometrics-heart rate measurement and atrial fibrillation detection-had comparably stronger support. Strengths and limitations to the current evidence base are identified, along with recommendations for informed patient use and the further research needed to responsibly support the integration of consumer wearables into outpatient care pathways. A living umbrella review repository is provided on the Open Science Framework so that findings can be updated as new, review-level evidence for emergent technologies becomes available.
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.