Key result
DOFIT PRO accurately tracks resting HR and steps but deteriorates during vigorous and arm-dominant tasks.
Why the study?
To evaluate the criterion validity of a new wearable device (DOFIT PRO) for measuring HR, step count, and EE, and compare accuracy across four wrist placements.
Does the DOFIT PRO wearable device accurately measure heart rate, steps, and energy expenditure compared to criterion measures in healthy adults?
Observational (n=32)
Does the DOFIT PRO wearable device accurately measure heart rate, steps, and energy expenditure compared to criterion measures in healthy adults?
The DOFIT PRO wearable is accurate for resting heart rate and step counts in controlled contexts, but underestimates heart rate and energy expenditure during vigorous exercise.
DOFIT PRO should not yet guide exercise monitoring; leaves open need for activity-specific validation and algorithm refinement.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the criterion validity of a new wearable device (DOFIT PRO) for heart rate (HR), step count, and energy expenditure (EE), and to compare accuracy across four wrist placements in laboratory and simulated free-living protocols. Approach: Thirty-two healthy adults wore four devices (right/left; proximal/distal) during a treadmill protocol (rest, 3.2 and 6.4 km/h walking, 9.7 km/h jogging, recovery) and ten standardized simulated free-living protocols. Criterion measures were chest-strap HR, video-verified steps, and indirect calorimetry (laboratory EE) and ActiGraph accelerometry (simulated free-living EE). Agreement was assessed using mean difference and mean absolute percentage error (MAPE). Main results: HR MAPE was excellent at rest/recovery (0.61-5.18%) but deteriorated during brisk walking (20.69-27.63%) and jogging (32.96-41.77%), with substantial underestimation. Step-count accuracy was excellent-good for walking (1.94-7.30%) and good-acceptable for stair climbing (6.05-11.66%), but running showed strong placement effects (treadmill jogging MAPE: right wrist 38.84-50.35% vs. left wrist 7.97-13.47%). Arm-dominant tasks produced marked step overestimation (e.g., shopping MAPE 83-95%). EE showed the lowest validity overall, with the most consistent performance during simulated free-living protocols (MAPE 6.98-10.93%) and improved accuracy on the left wrist during vigorous tasks. Significance: DOFIT PRO appears suitable for resting HR monitoring and step-based assessment of locomotor activity in controlled contexts, whereas vigorous-exercise HR and EE estimates should be interpreted cautiously with attention to activity type and wear location. These findings align with broader evidence that wearable validity is activity- and context-dependent and support the need for device- and placement-specific validation. Key words: DOFIT PRO; criterion validity; wrist placement; heart rate; step count.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Healthy adults (n=32). DOFIT PRO wearable device vs. Criterion measures (chest-strap HR, video-verified steps, indirect calorimetry, ActiGraph) was evaluated on Criterion validity for heart rate, step count, and energy expenditure assessed by mean absolute percentage error (MAPE). The DOFIT PRO wearable device showed excellent accuracy for resting heart rate (MAPE 0.61-5.18%) and walking steps (MAPE 1.94-7.30%), but deteriorated during vigorous exercise and arm-dominant tasks.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: