“Some fitness trackers are a lot more accurate than others, finds a new study published in JAMA Cardiology,” Mandy Oaklander reports for TIME Magazine.

“Researchers at Cleveland Clinic wanted to test how well four popular wearable devices measured heart rate, which is involved in a formula that calculate how many calories a person is burning while they exercise,” Oaklander reports. “They hooked 50 healthy adults up to an electrocardiogram (EKG), the gold-standard test for measuring heart activity, and compared the results to heart rates obtained by Fitbit Charge HR, Apple Watch, Mio Alpha and Basis Peak. They also assessed a chest strap. The researchers measured everyone at rest, then walking and jogging on a treadmill.”

“The chest strap monitor was the most accurate, nearly matching the EKG with 99% accuracy—both technologies capture electrical activity coming from the heart,” Oaklander reports. “Of the wrist wearables, Apple Watch was about 90% accurate, but ‘the other ones dropped off into the low 80s for their accuracy,’ says Dr. Gordon Blackburn, one of the study’s authors and director of cardiac rehabilitation at Cleveland Clinic.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: As we wrote a week ago:

We’ve had good, consistent results with our Apple Watch (Series 0) heart monitors (they accurately matched results from chest-worn straps) while running, but we’re glad to see Apple working to improve things even further.

We can’t wait for our Apple Watch Nike+ units to arrive!!!

Apple patents advanced heart rate monitor for Apple Watch – October 6, 2016
Apple files patent application for heart-monitoring wearable device – August 12, 2016
Apple Watch heart rate data vs. Mio dedicated heart rate monitor – May 7, 2015
Apple explains Heart Rate on Apple Watch technology – April 20, 2015