ppietra

wiggin said:

franklinjackcon said:

ppietra said:

For more information
http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/article-abstract/2566167

Interesting. Always pays to read the original. Based on that one page summary, I think this AI article might be wrong. The Mio Fuse had almost the same results as the Apple Watch so the sentence "The others dropped into the "low 80s," seems to only refer to the Fitbit and Basis

I was wondering how the AI article managed to lump the Mio in with the other low-end watches as that is usually considered one of the better consumer optical HR monitors. Nice bit of selective journalism there, AI. LOL  

It would be interesting to see a more comprehensive study with more devices, including more devices that are in the same higher-end category as the Apple watch (Garmin, Suunto, etc). But as the original research letter (ie, not a full-blown study) said, this was just a "convenience sample" (probably the devices the researches already personally owned LOL) of devices and "results should be confirmed with different types of exercises and with other devices."

larrya said:

Curious - how does this study declare "best on market" when only 3 other brands are compared?  No Garmin?  No  TomTom spark? No Suunto?  No modern Fitbit, say something that was released after 2014?  Can we have something better than hollow victories?