Device research record
Fitbit Sense
Signals and sensors
From the device record. Fields the source does not state are left out.
- Maker
- Google / Fitbit
- Form factor
- Wrist
- Series
- Sense
- Signals recorded
- PPG, Accelerometer, EDA, Temperature
- Also called
- Sense
What published studies show
Results quoted from 3 published validation studies, each against a clinical reference. A result applies to the model and protocol tested, not to every model the brand sells. From the wearable accuracy database (v1.0.0).
Heart rate during exercise1 study
| Device tested | Result | Reference | Sample | Study |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fitbit Sense | 4.14–10.76%Coefficient of variation | ECG chest strap (Polar H7/H10) | n = 60, Sitting, walking, running, resistance, cycling | Hajj-Boutros et al. (2023)Funding not reported |
- Fitbit Sense4.14–10.76%
Coefficient of variation · vs ECG chest strap (Polar H7/H10) · n = 60, Sitting, walking, running, resistance, cycling
Hajj-Boutros et al. (2023) Funding not reported
Sleep stages (4-stage)1 study
| Device tested | Result | Reference | Sample | Study |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fitbit Sense | κ = 0.42Cohen's kappa | Polysomnography (PSG) | n = 37, Sleep laboratory, 1 night | Schyvens et al. (2025)Funding not reported |
- Fitbit Senseκ = 0.42
Cohen's kappa · vs Polysomnography (PSG) · n = 37, Sleep laboratory, 1 night
Schyvens et al. (2025) Funding not reported
Sleep vs wake (2-stage)1 study
| Device tested | Result | Reference | Sample | Study |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fitbit Sense | > 90% (all devices)Sensitivity | Polysomnography (PSG) | n = 62, Sleep laboratory, 1 night | Schyvens et al. (2025)Funding not reported |
- Fitbit Sense> 90% (all devices)
Sensitivity · vs Polysomnography (PSG) · n = 62, Sleep laboratory, 1 night
Schyvens et al. (2025) Funding not reported
Atrial fibrillation detection1 study
| Device tested | Result | Reference | Sample | Study |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fitbit Sensesmartwatch ECG app, inconclusive tracings counted | 66% (spec 79%)Sensitivity | 12-lead ECG | n = 201, Tertiary cardiology service, single-lead ECG algorithms | Mannhart et al. (2023)Funding not reported |
| Fitbit Sensesmartwatch ECG app, inconclusive tracings counted | 79%Specificity | 12-lead ECG | n = 201, Tertiary cardiology service, single-lead ECG algorithms | Mannhart et al. (2023)Funding not reported |
- Fitbit Sense66% (spec 79%)
Sensitivity, smartwatch ECG app, inconclusive tracings counted · vs 12-lead ECG · n = 201, Tertiary cardiology service, single-lead ECG algorithms
Mannhart et al. (2023) Funding not reported
- Fitbit Sense79%
Specificity, smartwatch ECG app, inconclusive tracings counted · vs 12-lead ECG · n = 201, Tertiary cardiology service, single-lead ECG algorithms
Mannhart et al. (2023) Funding not reported
Energy expenditure (calories)1 study
| Device tested | Result | Reference | Sample | Study |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fitbit Sense | 13.44–29.66% (poor in all activities)Coefficient of variation | Indirect calorimetry | n = 60, Sitting, walking, running, resistance, cycling | Hajj-Boutros et al. (2023)Funding not reported |
- Fitbit Sense13.44–29.66% (poor in all activities)
Coefficient of variation · vs Indirect calorimetry · n = 60, Sitting, walking, running, resistance, cycling
Hajj-Boutros et al. (2023) Funding not reported
Comparisons
Head-to-head pages that name Fitbit Sense come first, then other comparisons for the brand.