Data underlying the publication: Effect of grace period on false alarm rates of smartwatch-based OHCA detection systems: a pilot study

DOI:10.4121/e1a2752f-7b98-45e2-bb61-7b1d3eec0b0c.v1
The DOI displayed above is for this specific version of this dataset, which is currently the latest. Newer versions may be published in the future. For a link that will always point to the latest version, please use
DOI: 10.4121/e1a2752f-7b98-45e2-bb61-7b1d3eec0b0c

Datacite citation style

Hup, Roelof; Plaisier, Myrthe; Machiavello, Tobias; van Spreuwel, Sophie (2025): Data underlying the publication: Effect of grace period on false alarm rates of smartwatch-based OHCA detection systems: a pilot study. Version 1. 4TU.ResearchData. dataset. https://doi.org/10.4121/e1a2752f-7b98-45e2-bb61-7b1d3eec0b0c.v1
Other citation styles (APA, Harvard, MLA, Vancouver, Chicago, IEEE) available at Datacite

Dataset

The data were collected during a human study with 26 participants: 15 in a ‘young’ (21-27 years, 12 male) and 11 in a ‘old’ (56-65 year, 5 male). All participants were instructed to wear a LilyGo T-Watch 2020 V3 programmable smartwatch between 12 PM and 10 PM and to cancel any alarm produced by the watch as quickly as possible by tapping its screen. The smartwatch recorded the response time from alarm onset to cancellation.


Prior to the experiment, the participants were informed that in real situations, the smartwatch would alert emergency medical services if an alarm was not cancelled in time. Further incentives included extra monetary compensation (€5) for the two fastest participants in each age group on top of base compensation (€12-€15). Nevertheless, we insisted on prioritizing safety over speed.


During each trial, the watch produced 9-18 alarms on a predefined schedule. Before triggering, the watch checked for 10 seconds of motionlessness within 10 minutes using its accelerometer, as motionlessness was expected to be an indicator considered by OHCA detection algorithms. If no motionlessness could be detected, the scheduled alarm was excluded from analysis. Furthermore, if an alarm was not cancelled within 60 seconds, the alarm would cease and be marked as censored.


Three alarm types were randomly scheduled:

  • Auditory: 4 beeps (at 2050 and 4100 Hz) of 60 ms with pauses of 60 ms, followed by 580 ms of silence.
  • Tactile: 3 vibration pulses (at 60 Hz) of 500 ms followed by an 800 ms pulse, with pauses of 400 ms.
  • Audiotactile: Combination of auditory and tactile alarms.

During all alarms, the display blinked (500 ms on, 500 ms off). The watches produced 139 auditory, 144 tactile, and 142 audiotactile alarms, yielding a total of 425 alarms.


Furthermore, participants were requested to keep a diary of their activities at the time of an alarm. With limited compliance to this instruction, not every activity could be matched to a smartwatch alarm or vice versa.


This study was performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines, including the Declaration of Helsinki. Approval of the study was obtained from the Ethical Review Board of the Human Technology Interaction group at Eindhoven University of Technology (ref. 1906). The privacy rights of the participants have been observed, and written informed consent was obtained from each participant.

History

  • 2025-08-04 first online, published, posted

Publisher

4TU.ResearchData

Format

csv

Funding

  • PPP Allowance made available by Top Sector Life Sciences & Health to the Dutch Heart Foundation to stimulate public-private partnerships (grant code 01-003-2021-B005) Dutch Heart Foundation
  • Philips Electronics Nederland B.V. Philips Electronics Nederland B.V.

Organizations

Eindhoven University of Technology, Department of Electrical Engineering, Signal Processing Systems

DATA

Files (4)