Talk:Heart rate tracking
" As such they might be less appropriate for long-term data collection, similar to chest straps." The glue on ecg are a hassle but they are also designed to be worn for at least a day .All those formal medical devices like the Zeo zio? are "stick it on for a week" glue ecg probes. Chest straps are designed to be worn for the length of an exercise period like two hours. Chest straps are also worse to wear to sleep. How long is long term? Certainly not like chest straps.
- That's a good point, I guess it's conflating 2 types of long-term: "Over-night wearing" and
a page on this or just a note[edit | edit source]
" I DG (talk) suspect it may be accelerometry - activity based guessing in the bad ones. This is very bad because the difference between what accelerometry would predict and what is actually happening is very important information."
In other words the difference between what the heart rate user is experiencing under exercise and what they should be is very important information and the device pawns off the first as the second. The difference should be pretty obvious if user does exercise that does not involve moving the relevant arm. Lot of devices do this with other sensors and then defend their dishonesty with words. They should not be allowed and there should be a page all about it!
- I'm not sure I fully understand. You mean that in some cases there's no actual PPG readings and it just uses the accelerometer-data to make a guess for the heart rate? Do you have an example of that? I know that most wearables that use PPG take movement into account but rather in order to remove the noise/artifacts that are introduced in the readings as a result of moving the arm. In that case I wouldn't say it's 'guessing'? - Gedankenstuecke (talk) 12:31, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
- yes and yes All those bands which do not register any heart rate increase if the one hand they were on was held still. I have run into at least 3 ex miband 3. If you want one like then just search for cheap smartwatches on amazon. I suppose the expensive new wearables do the "help ppg out with accelerometry" thing and that is not at all what I am talking about.
Should this be a topic page?[edit | edit source]
I noticed that these types of pages (those that contain collections of tools on a certain topic) are sometimes in the "tools" and sometimes in the "topics" category. The topic page that this page has as a property in the tool infobox redirects back to this page. I'd suggest changing it to a topic page, also as there is no other topic page on heart rate yet (only HRV). Title suggestion: "Heart rate and pulse tracking". What do you think? Katoss (talk) 16:26, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- HRV and HR are actually very similar. HRV is practically the better more advanced HR. These pages should probably be merged? Also I do not know if Pulse is really that necessary as part of the title. It definitely should be in the page and maybe redirecting to it. I imagine a new user looking for a tool, going to tools section and almost immediately finding the "tools for" subsection. Actually they would probably use search. I am ok with moving "Tools For" to topics but please leave the "Tools For" subcategory by not removing the phrase for the titles. or maybe adding "tools" at the end of the description like for Diet Tracking Tools. So people immediately know what type of page it is. DG (talk) 20:48, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- As discussed in 2022-09-29 Self-Research Chat: I merged the HRV and "tools for heart rate tracking" pages under the title "heart rate tracking", and transformed it into a topic page. page structure might needs to be adapted, right now it is basically one page below the other. - Katoss (talk) 18:51, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
- a few modifications; kind of . I will leave merging the tools sections up to Bastian. DG (talk) 00:47, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
potential sources[edit | edit source]