Abstract
Consumer wearable technology use is widespread and there is a need to validate measures obtained in uncontrolled settings. Because no standard exists for the treatment of heart rate data during exercise, the effect of different approaches on reliability (Coefficient of Variation [CV], Intraclass Correlation Coefficient [ICC]) and validity (Mean Absolute Percent Error [MAPE], Lin's Concordance Correlation Coefficient [CCC)] were determined in the Polar Verity Sense and OH1 during trail running. The Verity Sense met the reliability (CV < 5%, ICC > 0.7) and validity thresholds (MAPE < 5%, CCC > 0.9) in all cases. The OH1 met reliability thresholds in all cases except entire session average (ICC = 0.57). The OH1 met the validity MAPE threshold in all cases (3.3-4.1%), but not CCC (0.6-0.86). Despite various heart rate data processing methods, the approach may not affect reliability and validity interpretation provided adequate data points are obtained. It is also possible that a large volume of data will artificially inflate metrics.