The Use of Wearable Technology in Monitoring Physical Activity and Training: A Systematic Review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12775/QS.2026.62.73379Keywords
training otimalization, wearable technology, physical activity monitoring, measurement accuracy, systematic review, inertial measurement unitAbstract
Introduction and purpose: Wearable technologies have become widely adopted tools for monitoring physical activity and optimizing athletic training, yet comprehensive evaluations of their accuracy and effectiveness remain fragmented. This systematic review synthesizes evidence on wearable technology in physical activity monitoring and sport-specific training.
Materials and methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, SPORTDiscus, and CENTRAL was conducted for studies published between 2015 and 2025, following PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and primary validation studies were synthesized.
Brief description of the state of knowledge: Step counting reached acceptable accuracy in leading consumer devices (mean absolute percentage error below 25%), and optical heart rate sensors performed well at rest and moderate intensity (MAPE below 10%). Energy expenditure estimation remained inaccurate across all devices (MAPE exceeding 30%). An umbrella review of 39 systematic reviews found that 79% of physical activity analyses favored wearable interventions. A meta-analysis of 23 trials involving 4,566 older adults reported significant improvements in daily step counts and physical activity time, whereas no significant effects were found in youth populations.
Summary: Wearable devices offer acceptable accuracy for step counting and heart rate but not energy expenditure. Standardized validation protocols, algorithmic transparency, and long-term effectiveness studies are needed to maximize clinical and sporting utility.
References
1. Germini F, Noronha N, Borg Debono V, Abraham Philip B, Pete D, Navarro T, Keepanasseril A, Parpia S, de Wit K, Iorio A. Accuracy and acceptability of wrist-wearable activity-tracking devices: systematic review of the literature. J Med Internet Res. 2022;24(1):e30791. https://doi.org/10.2196/30791
2. Orzeł A, Pich-Czekierda A, Sieniawska D, et al. Measuring health: wearables in fitness tracking, stress relief, and sleep management. J Educ Health Sport. 2024;67:50673. https://doi.org/10.12775/JEHS.2024.67.003
3. Chen Z, Fan L, Zhu Q, Li Y, Wang X, Zhang H. Wearable sensors for precise exercise monitoring and analysis. Biosensors. 2025;15(11):734. https://doi.org/10.3390/bios15110734
4. Seçkin AÇ, Ateş B, Seçkin M. Review on wearable technology in sports: concepts, challenges and opportunities. Appl Sci. 2023;13(18):10399. https://doi.org/10.3390/app131810399
5. Henriksen A, Haugen Mikalsen M, Woldaregay AZ, Muzny M, Hartvigsen G, Hopstock LA, Grimsgaard S. Using fitness trackers and smartwatches to measure physical activity in research: analysis of consumer wrist-worn wearables. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(3):e110. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.9157
6. Kajzar M. Wearable devices for training and patient monitoring: a comprehensive review. Qual Sport. 2024;19:55667. https://doi.org/10.12775/QS.2024.19.55667
7. Shei RJ, Holder IG, Oumsang AS, Paris BA, Paris HL. Wearable activity trackers—advanced technology or advanced marketing? Eur J Appl Physiol. 2022;122(9):1975-1990. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-022-04951-1
8. Peake JM, Kerr G, Sullivan JP. A critical review of consumer wearables, mobile applications, and equipment for providing biofeedback, monitoring stress, and sleep in physically active populations. Front Physiol. 2018;9:743. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2018.00743
9. Chuah DCN, Lim NC, Choo NC. Reporting adherence, validity and physical activity measures of wearable activity trackers in medical research: a systematic review. Int J Med Inform. 2022;160:104696. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2022.104696
10. Germini F, Noronha N, Borg Debono V, et al. Accuracy and acceptability of wrist-wearable activity-tracking devices: a systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2022;24(1):e30791. https://doi.org/10.2196/30791
11. Chevance G, Golaszewski NM, Baretta D, Hekler EB, Larsen BA, Patrick K, Godino JG. Keeping pace with wearables: a living umbrella review of systematic reviews evaluating the accuracy of consumer wearable technologies in health measurement. Sports Med. 2024;54(11):2825-2848. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-024-02067-0
12. Ferguson T, Olds T, Curtis R, Blake H, Crozier AJ, Dankiw K, Dumuid D, Kasai D, O'Connor E, Virgara R, Maher C. Effectiveness of wearable activity trackers to increase physical activity and improve health: a systematic review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Lancet Digit Health. 2022;4(8):e615-e626. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(22)00111-X
13. Li R, Li Y, Wang L, Li L, Fu C, Hu D, Wei Q. Wearable activity tracker-based interventions for physical activity, body composition, and physical function among community-dwelling older adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Med Internet Res. 2025;27:e59507. https://doi.org/10.2196/59507
14. Espinosa H, Mears A, Stamm A, Ohgi Y, Coniglio C. Wearable sensor technology in sports monitoring. Sports Eng. 2025;28:4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12283-025-00485-9
15. Robertson J, Zendler K, De Mey J, Haycraft GI, Ash C, Brockett D, Seshadri C, Woods L, Kober R, Aughey J, Rogowski J. Development of a sports technology quality framework. J Sports Sci. 2024 (ahead of print). https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2024.2308435
16. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
17. Chow JJ, Thom JM, Wewege MA, Ward RE, Fulcher ML. Consumer wearable health and fitness technology in cardiovascular medicine: JACC state-of-the-art review. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2023;82(3):245-264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2023.04.054
18. Düking P, Fuss FK, Holmberg HC, Sperlich B. Recommendations for assessment of the reliability, sensitivity, and validity of data provided by wearable sensors designed for monitoring physical activity. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2018;6(4):e102. https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.9341
19. Brickwood KJ, Watson G, O'Brien J, Williams AD. Consumer-based wearable activity trackers increase physical activity participation: systematic review and meta-analysis. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019;7(4):e11819. https://doi.org/10.2196/11819
20. Wang X, Li B, Guo Y, Zhang Y, Chen S, Wang L. Effect of wearable activity trackers on physical activity in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Digit Health. 2024;6(9):e624-e635. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(24)00139-0
21. Zhang Y, Liu J, Chen X, Wang H, Li M. Effectiveness of wearable activity trackers on physical activity among adolescents in school-based settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Public Health. 2025;25:319. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-025-21497-5
22. Gibala MJ, Coyle EF, Jeukendrup AE. The integration of multi-sensor wearables in elite sport. Gatorade Sports Science Institute, Sports Science Exchange. 2025;#265. https://www.gssiweb.org/sports-science-exchange/article/the-integration-of-multi-sensor-wearables-in-elite-sport (Accessed: 29.05.2025).
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Dominika Grzybowska, Weronika Grzyb, Kamil Idzik, Adrianna Jaślikowska, Adrian Kubicki, Michał Kurnik, Maria Leśniak, Natalia Niderla, Natalia Rachwał, Jakub Rzeszutek

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Stats
Number of views and downloads: 114
Number of citations: 0