PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
January 10, 2026Applied Sciences1 citationsOpen Access

Are We Really Training at the Desired Intensity? Concurrent Validity of 16 Commercial Photoplethysmography-Based Heart Rate Monitors

POPablo Toral OropesaASAlejandro Sánchez-PayECElena Conesa-Ros

Key Result

PPG-based heart rate monitors demonstrated excellent validity (ICC > 0.90) but showed increased error at higher intensities, particularly during HIIT sessions.

Key Points

  • This research aims to assess the accuracy of various photoplethysmography-based heart rate monitors during different exercise intensities.
  • Conducted incremental maximal aerobic tests and high-intensity interval training sessions.
  • Used a Polar H9 chest strap as the reference for heart rate accuracy.
  • Evaluated 16 different PPG-based heart rate monitors under varying exercise conditions.
  • Achieved excellent concurrent validity with an ICC greater than 0.90 compared to the reference device.
  • Noted increased error metrics as exercise intensity rose, particularly during high-intensity interval training.
  • Identified significant device-dependent variations in accuracy, data retention, and error rates.

Structured PICO

Does the use of commercial PPG-based wearable heart rate monitors accurately measure heart rate compared to a reference chest strap in well-trained male endurance athletes across various exercise intensities?

P
Population
10 well-trained male endurance athletes
I
Intervention
16 commercial photoplethysmography (PPG)-based wearable heart rate monitors (Amazfit Fit5; Apple Ultra and SE; Garmin 35, 45, 235, and 935; Polar M200, M430, OH1, Vantage M, Vantage V, Vantage V3, and Verity Sense; Galaxy Watch 5, Suunto 3 Fitness) worn during incremental maximal aerobic (IMA) tests and high-intensity interval training (HIIT) sessions
C
Comparator
Polar H9 chest strap (reference criterion)
O
Outcome
Concurrent validity of HR records (measured via Intraclass Correlation Coefficient [ICC], BIAS, Standard Error of Measurement [SEM], and Coefficient of Variation [CV])surrogate

Commercial PPG-based heart rate monitors show device-dependent accuracy that decreases at higher exercise intensities, suggesting caution when interpreting data during intense training.

Abstract

The validity and accuracy of photoplethysmography (PPG)-based wearable heart rate (HR) monitors remain debatable. This study aimed to determine the concurrent validity of HR records from a wide range of contemporary PPG monitors across the full spectrum of exercise intensities and running conditions. Ten well-trained male endurance athletes performed several incremental maximal aerobic (IMA) tests and high-intensity interval training (HIIT) sessions while wearing a Polar H9 chest strap, as the reference criterion; 16 PPG-based heart rate monitors were tested (Amazfit Fit5; Apple Ultra and SE; Garmin 35, 45, 235, and 935; Polar M200, M430, OH1, Vantage M, Vantage V, Vantage V3, and Verity Sense; Galaxy Watch 5, Suunto 3 Fitness). The results showed excellent ICC (>0.90) versus the reference device across IMA and HIIT tests. Overall, the ICC decreased, and magnitudes of error increased (BIAS, SEM, and CV) as the intensity increased. Moreover, lower ICC values and greater BIAS, SEM, and CV were observed during the HIIT compared to the IMA test. Nevertheless, notable differences between devices were observed in magnitude of errors, accuracy, data loss, and read failures. In conclusion, PPG-based HR monitor validity is device-dependent and therefore exercise data from running training and competitions should be interpreted with caution.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Oropesa et al. (2025) studied this question. PPG-based heart rate monitors demonstrated excellent validity (ICC > 0.90) but showed increased error at higher intensities, particularly during HIIT sessions.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6963223291e05aa366cb8c9chttps://doi.org/10.3390/app16010126
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper