Key result
A review of wearable devices for physiological signal measurement found a lack of standardized methods and shared consensus for their metrological characterization and validation.
Why the study?
Data on the metrological characterization of wearable devices measuring physiological signals are often missing or obtained with non-standardized methods, leading to barely comparable results.
Highlights the critical need for standardized metrological characterization and rigorous test protocols for wearable physiological sensors to ensure accurate interpretation of medical and diagnostic data.
Supports cautious clinical interpretation of wearable data; leaves open consensus on standardized metrological validation protocols.
Wearable devices are rapidly spreading in many different application fields and with diverse measurement accuracy targets. However, data on their metrological characterization are very often missing or obtained with non-standardized methods, hence resulting in barely comparable results. The aim of this review paper is to discuss the existing methods for the metrological characterization of wearable sensors exploited for the measurement of physiological signals, highlighting the room for research still available in this field. Furthermore, as a case study, the authors report a customized method they have tuned for the validation of wireless electrocardiographic monitors. The literature provides a plethora of test/validation procedures, but there is no shared consensus on test parameters (e.g. test population size, test protocol, output parameters of validation procedure, etc.); on the other hand, manufacturers rarely provide measurement accuracy values and, even when they do, the test protocol and data processing pipelines are generally not disclosed. Given the increasing interest and demand of wearable sensors also for medical and diagnostic purposes, the metrological performance of such devices should be always considered, to be able to adequately interpret the results and always deliver them associated with the related measurement accuracy.•The sensor metrological performance should be always properly considered.•There are no standard methods for wearable sensors metrological characterization.•It is important to define rigorous test protocols, easily tunable for specific target applications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cosoli et al. (2023) conducted a review in Physiological signal measurement. Wearable devices for physiological signals was evaluated. A review of wearable devices for physiological signal measurement found a lack of standardized methods and shared consensus for their metrological characterization and validation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: