ACCURACY OF CORE TEMPERATURE ESTIMATION FROM WEARABLE DEVICES DURING EXERCISE

PURPOSE: Estimating core body temperature (Tc) from photoplethysmography heart rate (HR) measured using wearable technology may be preferable to more expensive and invasive measures of Tc, but its accuracy is unknown. METHODS: 29 healthy adults (55% female; mean ± SD, age = 25 ± 5 y, body mass = 74.8 ± 14.8 kg) completed 2 visits (TEMP, 22 °C; HOT, 35 °C). Participants inserted a flexible rectal thermistor for the measurement of rectal temperature (Tre), the criterion measure of Tc, and were outfitted with 2 wearable devices (SlateSafety BAND V2, Apple Watch Series 8). Data were recorded continuously during rest, 40 min of cycling (10 min each at 50%, 60%, 70%, and 80% of age-predicted maximal HR [HRmax]), and recovery. Tc was estimated directly from HR by the SlateSafety device (TcSS) and retrospectively from Apple Watch HR data (TcApple) using an open-source algorithm. A two-way (intensity × device) repeated measures analysis of variance was used to compare Tre, TcSS, and TcApple in TEMP and HOT. An acceptable mean difference between device Tc and Tre of ±0.25 °C was set a priori. RESULTS: There was a significant intensity × device interaction during TEMP (P < 0.001) and HOT (P < 0.001). At rest, Tc was not different during TEMP (Tre = 37.13 ± 0.37 °C, TcSS = 37.07 ± 0.30 °C, TcApple = 37.13 ± 0.37 °C, all P > 0.05) or HOT (Tre = 37.04 ± 0.31 °C, TcSS = 37.19 ± 0.39 °C, TcApple = 37.04 ± 0.31 °C, all P > 0.05) but estimated Tc was greater than Tre and exceeded the ±0.25 °C acceptable difference at vigorous intensity exercise (80% HRmax) during TEMP (Tre = 37.60 ± 0.22 °C, TcSS = 38.35 ± 0.15 °C, TcApple = 38.00 ± 0.16 °C, all P < 0.001) and HOT (Tre = 37.55 ± 0.32 °C, TcSS = 38.40 ± 0.15 °C, TcApple = 38.00 ± 0.14 °C, all P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: HR-estimated Tc agreed with criterion Tc under resting conditions but overestimated Tre at higher exercise intensities. Supported by: This study was supported by an equipment grant from SlateSafety (Atlanta, GA).

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Published
2025-09-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0001157728.70835.7c
Primary Topic
Infrared Thermography in Medicine
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

ACCURACY OF CORE TEMPERATURE ESTIMATION FROM WEARABLE DEVICES DURING EXERCISE

Jonathan E. Wingo, Hayley V. MacDonald, Garrett Reuben, Jonathan B. Burks et al.
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Infrared Thermography in Medicine
article

ACCURACY OF CORE TEMPERATURE ESTIMATION FROM WEARABLE DEVICES DURING EXERCISE

Jonathan E. Wingo, Hayley V. MacDonald, Garrett Reuben, Jonathan B. Burks, Anne M. Mullholland
article en

Abstract

PURPOSE: Estimating core body temperature (Tc) from photoplethysmography heart rate (HR) measured using wearable technology may be preferable to more expensive and invasive measures of Tc, but its accuracy is unknown. METHODS: 29 healthy adults (55% female; mean ± SD, age = 25 ± 5 y, body mass = 74.8 ± 14.8 kg) completed 2 visits (TEMP, 22 °C; HOT, 35 °C). Participants inserted a flexible rectal thermistor for the measurement of rectal temperature (Tre), the criterion measure of Tc, and were outfitted with 2 wearable devices (SlateSafety BAND V2, Apple Watch Series 8). Data were recorded continuously during rest, 40 min of cycling (10 min each at 50%, 60%, 70%, and 80% of age-predicted maximal HR [HRmax]), and recovery. Tc was estimated directly from HR by the SlateSafety device (TcSS) and retrospectively from Apple Watch HR data (TcApple) using an open-source algorithm. A two-way (intensity × device) repeated measures analysis of variance was used to compare Tre, TcSS, and TcApple in TEMP and HOT. An acceptable mean difference between device Tc and Tre of ±0.25 °C was set a priori. RESULTS: There was a significant intensity × device interaction during TEMP (P < 0.001) and HOT (P < 0.001). At rest, Tc was not different during TEMP (Tre = 37.13 ± 0.37 °C, TcSS = 37.07 ± 0.30 °C, TcApple = 37.13 ± 0.37 °C, all P > 0.05) or HOT (Tre = 37.04 ± 0.31 °C, TcSS = 37.19 ± 0.39 °C, TcApple = 37.04 ± 0.31 °C, all P > 0.05) but estimated Tc was greater than Tre and exceeded the ±0.25 °C acceptable difference at vigorous intensity exercise (80% HRmax) during TEMP (Tre = 37.60 ± 0.22 °C, TcSS = 38.35 ± 0.15 °C, TcApple = 38.00 ± 0.16 °C, all P < 0.001) and HOT (Tre = 37.55 ± 0.32 °C, TcSS = 38.40 ± 0.15 °C, TcApple = 38.00 ± 0.14 °C, all P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: HR-estimated Tc agreed with criterion Tc under resting conditions but overestimated Tre at higher exercise intensities. Supported by: This study was supported by an equipment grant from SlateSafety (Atlanta, GA).

Medicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseVol. 57(10S)
Mercer University (US), University of Alabama (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 63%
Infrared Thermography in Medicine
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.