Trusted Intelligent Sensing for Sport–Medicine Integrated Physical Activity Interventions: A Framework and Research Agenda
Full Text

Keywords

physical activity
wearable sensors
intelligent sensing
sport–medicine integration
closed-loop intervention

Categories

How to Cite

Chad Jensen, Anthony Murphy, & Liam Morley. (2026). Trusted Intelligent Sensing for Sport–Medicine Integrated Physical Activity Interventions: A Framework and Research Agenda. Journal of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, 2(10), 32-35. https://doi.org/10.64904/20261006
Crossmark

Abstract

Physical inactivity is among the largest modifiable contributors to the global burden of cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and several cancers, yet one in three adults worldwide still does not meet minimum activity recommendations (Guthold et al., 2024). Sports promotion and medical care have historically operated as separate systems: the sports sector delivers activity opportunities without clinical follow-up, while the medical sector treats the consequences of inactivity without prescribing exercise as a therapy. “Sport–medicine integration” — the deliberate coupling of physical-activity promotion with clinical and public-health pathways — is now a stated policy goal, but its delivery has been limited by the lack of trustworthy measurement and feedback between the two sectors. This Perspective argues that high-assurance intelligent sensing — wearable inertial and photoplethysmographic sensors, on-device activity recognition, and privacy-preserving data pipelines — is the missing technical layer that can make sport–medicine integration operable. We define six requirements for “high assurance”: clinical-grade accuracy across populations, transparent and human-auditable algorithms, privacy-preserving data handling, fairness across demographic groups, regulatory validity, and a closed-loop feedback path back to both the user and the clinician. We propose a four-layer framework — sensing, assurance, prescription, and feedback — and map the current evidence against it. The field’s priority is not more activity trackers but prospective, population-validated intervention trials in which sensing data drive tailored exercise prescriptions and are evaluated against health outcomes rather than step counts alone.

Full Text

References

[1] American College of Sports Medicine. (2021). ACSM’s guidelines for exercise testing and prescription (11th ed.). Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer.

[2] Bent, B., Goldstein, B. A., Kibbe, W. A., & Dunn, J. P. (2020). Investigating sources of inaccuracy in wearable optical heart rate sensors. npj Digital Medicine, 3, 18. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-020-0226-6

[3] Cheng, X., Zhang, L., & Su, Y. (2023). Real-time sensor-embedded neural network for human activity recognition. Sensors, 23(19), 8127. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23198127

[4] Evenson, K. R., Spade, D. J., & Hope, M. (2020). Reliability and validity of commercially available wearable devices for measuring steps, energy expenditure, and heart rate: Systematic review. JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 8(9), e18694. https://doi.org/10.2196/18694

[5] Guthold, R., Bull, F. C., et al. (2024). National, regional, and global trends in insufficient physical activity among adults from 2000 to 2022: A pooled analysis of 507 population-based surveys with 5.7 million participants. The Lancet Global Health, 12(8), e1264–e1274. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(24)00112-3

[6] Lee, I.-M., Shiroma, E. J., Lobelo, F., Puska, P., Blair, S. N., & Katzmarzyk, P. T. (2012). Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide: An analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy. The Lancet, 380(9838), 219–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61031-9

[7] Lyu, J., Wu, Y., Li, X., et al. (2023). The effectiveness of wearable activity trackers for increasing physical activity and reducing sedentary time in older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Digital Health, 9, 20552076231176705. https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076231176705

[8] Perez, M. V., Mahaffey, K. W., Hedlin, H., Rumsfeld, J. S., Garcia, A., Ferris, T., Balasubramanian, V., Russo, A. M., Rajmane, A., Cheung, L., Hung, G., Lee, J., Waalen, J., Silva, C. T., Odisho, F., Maguire, M., & Talati, N. (2019). Large-scale assessment of a smartwatch to identify atrial fibrillation. New England Journal of Medicine, 381(20), 1909–1917. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1901183

[9] Roth, H. R., Weidner, E., & Iommi, M. (2023). Federated learning for medical imaging. British Journal of Radiology, 96(1145), 20220890. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20220890

[10] Siopis, G., Moschonis, G., Eweka, E., Jung, J., Kwasnicka, D., Yeboah-Asiamah Asare, B., Kodithuwakku, V., Willems, R., Verhaeghe, N., Annemans, L., Vedanthan, R., Oldenburg, B., & Manios, Y. (2023). Effectiveness, reach, uptake, and feasibility of digital health interventions for adults with hypertension: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. The Lancet Digital Health, 5(3), e144–e159. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(23)00002-X

[11] U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2022). Software as a medical device (SaMD): Action plan. Silver Spring, MD: FDA.

[12] Visseren, F. L. J., Mach, F., Smulders, Y. M., et al. (2021). 2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice. European Heart Journal, 42(34), 3227–3337. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehab484

[13] World Health Organization. (2020). WHO guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Geneva: World Health Organization. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240015128

[14] World Health Organization. (2021). Ethics and governance of artificial intelligence for health: WHO guidance. Geneva: World Health Organization.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2026 Journal of Public Health and Preventive Medicine

6 4