ArticleAmerican journal of industrial medicine2026
Assessing the Feasibility of Wearable Devices for Physiological Monitoring and Heat Risk Prediction in Outdoor Agricultural Workers.
Article in American journal of industrial medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Assessing the Feasibility of Wearable Devices for Physiological Monitoring and Heat Risk Prediction in Outdoor Agricultural Workers.American journal of industrial medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOutdoor agricultural workers experience significant heat exposure, yet few studies have evaluated whether wearable sensors can reliably measure continuous physiological responses in real field conditions. This pilot study examined the feasibility and predictive utility of core temperature, hydration, heart rate, and movement data collected from commercially available wearables.
methodsThirty farmworkers in eastern North Carolina wore three devices, the CALERA core temperature sensor, the Nix Hydration Biosensor, and the Garmin Vivoactive smartwatch, during one July work shift. 1 min, physiological and environmental data were aligned to compute the modified Physiological Strain Index, mPSI. Device reliability, physiological responses, and heat exposure were summarized. Multi-linear regression and machine learning, Random Forest (RF) and Gradient Boosting Regression (GBR), models were evaluated to predict mPSI, using raw and smoothed predictors to estimate mPSI.
resultsCALERA retrieved 100 percent of the data, Garmin retrieved 97 percent, and Nix retrieved 80 percent. WBGT remained consistently high, approximately 28 to 29 degrees Celsius, and 12.6 percent of core temperature measurements exceeded 38 degrees Celsius. mPSI ranged from minimal to high heat strain, with 8.3 percent of observations at or above 5. Heart rate showed the strongest association with mPSI. The RF model using 60-min moving averages achieved the highest predictive accuracy with an R
conclusionMulti-sensor wearable systems are feasible for continuous heat strain monitoring and can support accurate prediction of heat-related risk among agricultural workers. This study is the first to evaluate the CALERA, Nix, and Garmin devices combined for heat strain monitoring in outdoor agricultural workers. By combining all three wearables in a field-based feasibility assessment, it addresses a key gap in validating consumer-grade technology for occupational safety in this high-risk workforce. The findings of the study support the use of wearable devices for real-time heat strain alerts, individualized hydration and work-rest guidance, and early warning systems to help prevent heat-related illness in physically demanding outdoor occupations.
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.