Wearable energy expenditure estimates now inform fitness decisions and metabolic-disease trial endpoints. Against doubly labeled water (DLW), validation studies report activity-component error of 19%–100%; against indirect calorimetry, wrist devices show laboratory medians above 20% and errors exceeding 100% in clinical populations. For motion-dominant pipelines, a substantial component of the residual error is mechanistic rather than purely algorithmic: the relevant metabolic state is absent from the motion signal, so better models of that signal alone cannot recover it. A four-layer framework decomposes that state into a circadian resting baseline, the thermic effect of food (TEF), walking economy, and thermoregulatory thermogenesis. Each layer names a measurable signal and the sensing or calibration step that recovers it. The roadmap runs from physiologists and sensor developers working against calorimetric references to the modeling teams downstream.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sabit et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: