1. This study assessed the data availability, accuracy, and concurrent validity of vital sign data measured with wearable sensors in volunteers during various daily life activities.
2. Data availability was high for all vital signs measured by VitalPatch and for HR and temperature measured by Everion.
3. The overall accuracy of HR was high for all wearable sensors, except during walking; VitalPatch had a small mean difference with large limits of agreement (LoA) for HR, RR, and temperature.
The article is generally reliable and trustworthy as it provides detailed information about the study design, methods used, results obtained, and conclusions drawn from the results. The authors have also provided sufficient evidence to support their claims regarding the accuracy of the wearable sensors tested in this study. Furthermore, they have discussed potential limitations of their study such as the small sample size used which may limit generalizability of their findings.
However, there are some areas where the article could be improved upon to make it more reliable and trustworthy. For example, there is no discussion about possible sources of bias or errors that may have affected the results obtained in this study such as observer bias or measurement error due to incorrect placement of sensors on participants' bodies. Additionally, there is no mention of any ethical considerations taken into account when conducting this research such as obtaining informed consent from participants or ensuring participant safety throughout the duration of the study. Finally, there is no discussion about how these findings can be applied in clinical practice or how they can be used to improve patient care outcomes which would have been beneficial to include in this article.