Cited by 159Non-Invasive Vital Sign MonitoringHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlECG Monitoring and Analysis

Accuracy Assessment of Oura Ring Nocturnal Heart Rate and Heart Rate Variability in Comparison With Electrocardiography in Time and Frequency Domains: Comprehensive Analysis

Open access
Cao, Rui, Azimi, Iman, Sarhaddi, Fatemeh, Niela-Vilen, Hannakaisa, Axelin, Anna, Liljeberg, Pasi, Rahmani, Amir M·2022·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Background: Photoplethysmography is a noninvasive and low-cost method to remotely and continuously track vital signs. The Oura Ring is a compact photoplethysmography-based smart ring, which has recently drawn attention to remote health monitoring and wellness applications. The ring is used to acquire nocturnal heart rate (HR) and HR variability (HRV) parameters ubiquitously. However, these parameters are highly susceptible to motion artifacts and environmental noise. Therefore, a validity assessment of the parameters is required in everyday settings. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the accuracy of HR and time domain and frequency domain HRV parameters collected by the Oura Ring against a medical grade chest electrocardiogram monitor. Methods: We conducted overnight home-based monitoring using an Oura Ring and a Shimmer3 electrocardiogram device. The nocturnal HR and HRV parameters of 35 healthy individuals were collected and assessed. We evaluated the parameters within 2 tests, that is, values collected from 5-minute recordings (ie, short-term HRV analysis) and the average values per night sleep. A linear regression method, the Pearson correlation coefficient, and the Bland–Altman plot were used to compare the measurements of the 2 devices. Results: Our findings showed low mean biases of the HR and HRV parameters collected by the Oura Ring in both the 5-minute and average-per-night tests. In the 5-minute test, the error variances of the parameters were different. The parameters provided by the Oura Ring dashboard (ie, HR and root mean square of successive differences [RMSSD]) showed relatively low error variance compared with the HRV parameters extracted from the normal interbeat interval signals. The Pearson correlation coefficient tests (P<.001) indicated that HR, RMSSD, average of normal heart beat intervals (AVNN), and percentage of successive normal beat-to-beat intervals that differ by more than 50 ms (pNN50) had high positive correlations with the baseline values; SD of normal beat-to-beat intervals (SDNN) and high frequency (HF) had moderate positive correlations, and low frequency (LF) and LF:HF ratio had low positive correlations. The HR, RMSSD, AVNN, and pNN50 had narrow 95% CIs; however, SDNN, LF, HF, and LF:HF ratio had relatively wider 95% CIs. In contrast, the average-per-night test showed that the HR, RMSSD, SDNN, AVNN, pNN50, LF, and HF had high positive relationships (P<.001), and the LF:HF ratio had a moderate positive relationship (P<.001). The average-per-night test also indicated considerably lower error variances than the 5-minute test for the parameters. Conclusions: The Oura Ring could accurately measure nocturnal HR and RMSSD in both the 5-minute and average-per-night tests. It provided acceptable nocturnal AVNN, pNN50, HF, and SDNN accuracy in the average-per-night test but not in the 5-minute test. In contrast, the LF and LF:HF ratio of the ring had high error rates in both tests.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/27487

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 44 · Cited by 159

Authors
Cao, R., Azimi, I., Sarhaddi, F., Niela-Vilen, H., Axelin, A., Liljeberg, P., & Rahmani, A. M.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Irvine (US)
  • University of Turku (FI)
Corresponding author
Cao, Rui
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2022-01-18
Volume
24
Issue
1
Pages
e27487
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3214555682
Cited by
159
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 41 · 2025: 51 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 11
FWCI
5.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UTUPub (University of Turku) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation (1702950)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Non-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › ECG Monitoring and Analysis
Keywords
Oura Ring, photoplethysmography, nocturnal heart rate, heart rate variability, electrocardiogram, device validation, motion artifacts, RMSSD, sleep monitoring, wearable sensors, remote patient monitoring, measurement accuracy, Bland-Altman agreement, pNN50, SDNN, LF/HF ratio
MeSH terms
Electrocardiography, Heart Rate, Humans, Sleep, Linear Models, Photoplethysmography

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review