Free buyer tool · no sign-up to use
Wearable Platform Evaluation Scorecard
Score your shortlist on what actually decides endpoint quality — signal quality, validated algorithms, wear-time, and execution — not the length of a device list. Adjust the weights to your protocol; the math is live.
Score up to three platforms
Rename the columns to the platforms you are evaluating. Set each criterion’s weight (1–5) by how much it matters to your study, then score each platform 1–5. The weighted total updates automatically.
| Criterion & weight | Weight | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Signal quality & data completenessWhat percentage of expected sensor data actually arrives usable, not just transmitted? Ask for completeness rates, not device uptime. | ||||
| Validated digital-biomarker algorithmsAre the measures derived from raw signal validated — and across how many of your specific devices, not just the vendor’s flagship? | ||||
| Wear-time compliance & recoveryWhat happens operationally when a participant stops wearing the device? Who notices, and who re-engages them, before data is lost? | ||||
| Device integration modelBYOD, provisioned, cellular, non-app — does it fit your population, or does capture depend on a participant managing an app? | ||||
| eCOA & execution includedIs eCOA/ePRO unified with wearables in one platform, or is it another vendor and another integration to coordinate? | ||||
| Device logistics & provisioningWho ships, configures, replaces, and tracks devices across your sites and countries? | ||||
| Multilingual human patient supportIs there trained human support in your study’s languages, or is troubleshooting left to site coordinators? | ||||
| Endpoint accountability & completionDoes the vendor own completion and data quality as a deliverable, or is hitting the number your team’s problem? | ||||
| Compliance postureHIPAA, GDPR, 21 CFR Part 11, ICH GCP, ISO 27001 — table stakes, but confirm it explicitly. | ||||
| Weighted score | — | 0% | 0% | 0% |
What “good” looks like, criterion by criterion
Use these as the questions to put to every vendor. The strongest answers describe an owned, operational model — not a dashboard or a spec sheet.
Signal quality & data completeness
What percentage of expected sensor data actually arrives usable, not just transmitted? Ask for completeness rates, not device uptime.
Validated digital-biomarker algorithms
Are the measures derived from raw signal validated — and across how many of your specific devices, not just the vendor’s flagship?
Wear-time compliance & recovery
What happens operationally when a participant stops wearing the device? Who notices, and who re-engages them, before data is lost?
Device integration model
BYOD, provisioned, cellular, non-app — does it fit your population, or does capture depend on a participant managing an app?
eCOA & execution included
Is eCOA/ePRO unified with wearables in one platform, or is it another vendor and another integration to coordinate?
Device logistics & provisioning
Who ships, configures, replaces, and tracks devices across your sites and countries?
Multilingual human patient support
Is there trained human support in your study’s languages, or is troubleshooting left to site coordinators?
Endpoint accountability & completion
Does the vendor own completion and data quality as a deliverable, or is hitting the number your team’s problem?
Compliance posture
HIPAA, GDPR, 21 CFR Part 11, ICH GCP, ISO 27001 — table stakes, but confirm it explicitly.
Want this scored against Delve — or as a PDF for your evaluation file?
We will walk your shortlist through this scorecard with you and show, line by line, where Delve’s owned execution model changes the score — validated algorithms across 25+ devices, signal quality control, and concierge wear-time recovery in 120+ languages.
Frequently asked questions
Using the scorecard
How do I evaluate a wearable platform for a clinical trial?
Score your shortlist against the dimensions that decide endpoint quality rather than device count: signal quality and data completeness, validated digital-biomarker algorithms and the devices they cover, wear-time compliance and recovery, the device integration model, whether eCOA and execution are included, logistics, multilingual support, endpoint accountability, and compliance posture. Weight each by how much it matters to your protocol, then score each platform 1 to 5. The scorecard on this page does the math for you.
What criteria matter most when choosing a wearable platform?
For most regulated studies, the highest-weighted criteria are signal quality and data completeness, validated algorithms across your specific devices, and wear-time recovery, because those are where endpoints actually degrade. Device count is the least predictive of success and is deliberately not a criterion here.
Is this scorecard vendor-neutral?
Yes. You enter your own weights and scores for any platforms you are evaluating, so the output reflects your judgment, not ours. The criteria are the ones that determine endpoint quality in wearable-enabled trials, and they apply to any vendor.
How does Delve Health score on these criteria?
You decide by scoring it yourself, but Delve is built to lead on the execution-heavy criteria: validated algorithms across 25+ devices, an owned signal quality control layer, concierge wear-time recovery in 120+ languages, and eCOA plus logistics in one platform. Compare it against your shortlist and see.
Related: How to compare wearable platforms · Best wearable platforms (2026) · All head-to-head comparisons
Score on what protects the endpoint, not what fills a spec sheet.
The platform that wins this scorecard is the one that owns signal quality and wear-time. Ask each vendor what happens when a participant stops wearing the device.
Book a Walkthrough