ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Reliability Assessment of Wearable Technologies for Physiological Measurements: An Evaluation of Shimmer3 GSR+, Empatica E4, EmbracePlus, and Pixel Watch 2 Across Cognitive, Affective and Physical Activity Tasks.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Wearable sensing has evolved from custom-built systems towards standardized research- and consumer-grade devices, improving accessibility and comparability in physiological data analysis. Wrist-worn sensors offer non-invasiveness, minimal setup, and suitability for everyday use, making them increasingly attractive for both research and real-world applications. However, it remains unclear how consumer-grade smartwatches compare with established research-grade wearables in physiological data quality and suitability for empirical studies. We present a mixed-methods study assessing the signal comparability and reliability of the research-grade Shimmer3 GSR+, Empatica E4, and the consumer-grade Pixel Watch 2 under controlled conditions including baseline, cognitive load (n-back), startle, relaxation and physical activity phases. A second study replicated key conditions to exploratorily compare the Empatica E4 with its successor, EmbracePlus. All wearables reliably captured pronounced physiological changes between distinct experimental conditions, but were less sensitive to subtle cognitive load differences and varied in absolute values and motion robustness. The Pixel Watch 2 effectively captured heart rate and skin temperature trends in dynamic settings, whereas research-grade devices remained preferable for analyses requiring raw data access, transparent data processing and advanced physiological metrics. Electrodermal activity provided the most consistent task differentiation under motion. Wrist-worn devices were perceived as more comfortable and less obtrusive than finger-based sensors.
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.