MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409460566 · doi:10.1177/00236772251318910

Accuracy of smartwatches for measuring heart rate and oxygen saturation in cynomolgus macaques compared to clinical standards

2025· article· en· W4409460566 on OpenAlexaff
Meghan Tiplady, Katya Douchant, Andrew Winterborn

Bibliographic record

VenueLaboratory Animals · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotoplethysmogramGold standard (test)Pulse oximetryOxygen saturationHeart rateMedicineSmartwatchCardiologyBiomedical engineeringAnesthesiaInternal medicineBlood pressureOxygenComputer scienceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Continuous monitoring of physiological parameters in non-human primates (NHPs) necessitates a precise, non-invasive, and convenient method. This study aimed to validate the use of smartwatches with integrated pulse oximetry and heart rate (HR) monitoring capabilities for use in NHPs. Currently, the clinical standard for non-invasive continuous monitoring of peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO 2 ) in NHPs has been the use of a transmittance pulse oximeter (TPO) affixed to a location of highly vascularized tissue. In a clinical setting, HR is monitored through electrocardiogram (ECG) or associated with SpO 2 measurement from a TPO probe utilizing photoplethysmography technology. Challenges in obtaining precise readings with TPOs stem from technological limitations and probe placement restrictions. To address these limitations, simultaneous HR and SpO 2 measurements were obtained from 15 cynomolgus macaques ( Macaca fascicularis ) using the Apple Watch 7 (AW 7), Apple Watch 9 (AW 9), and a clinical-grade TPO probe with integrated optical HR measurement technology (iM70, ELAN). Arterial blood gas (ABG) analysis was used as a reference method for SpO 2 . We found that a TPO device significantly underestimated SpO 2 compared to the AW 7 and AW 9 when referenced against ABG values. Smartwatch-derived HR and SpO 2 measurements demonstrated good agreement and minimal bias compared to the gold standard method. Overall, the AW 7 and AW 9 exhibited good agreement with clinical reference standards for HR and good agreement with the gold standard for SaO 2 in sedated cynomolgus macaques.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.649

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLaboratory AnimalsSame topicNon-Invasive Vital Sign MonitoringFrench-language works237,207