As wearable devices powered by artificial intelligence increasingly claim to offer insights into brain health, neurologists warn that consumer gadgets still fall far short of diagnosing or directly monitoring neurological diseases. While smartwatches, rings and sensor-based devices can track certain body signals, experts warn that while these devices are excellent for wellness tracking, there is a dangerous gap between “consumer hype” and “clinical reality.”
Brain health vs. consumer wearables: Understanding the limits
Dr. Mohan Krishna, Consultant Neurologist at Yashoda Hospitals (Hyderabad) emphasised that brain health is far more complex than what consumer wearables can currently capture. Devices that claim to monitor brain blood flow or “brain activity” have very limited clinical meaning, he said.
“Cerebral blood flow is tightly regulated by the brain itself and does not directly reflect ageing, mood, intelligence or thought processes. Monitoring blood flow alone, he says, is not the same as monitoring brain function.”
According to Dr Krishna, today’s wearables cannot detect neurological disorders. “At best, they offer indirect wellness signals by tracking parameters such as heart rate, breathing patterns, or sleep. These changes reflect how the body responds, not what is happening inside the brain. In contrast, medical tests such as MRI and CT scans reveal brain structure, while EEG and advanced imaging like PET scans assess brain function. These tests are validated, sophisticated, and cannot be replaced by wearable devices.”
There are, however, a few narrow areas where wearables show limited potential. Dr Krishna pointed out that in some epilepsy patients, changes in heart rate, sweating or bodily sensations that occur before a seizure may sometimes be detected and used as alerts. Research is also ongoing in migraine, where early bodily signals may help identify patterns. However, these applications are specialised and not intended for the general population.
Separating medical reliability from experimental hype
Dr. Sorabh Gupta, Consultant Neurologist at Kailash Hospital (Dehradun) stressed the importance of separating medically reliable uses of wearables from experimental technology and hype. He said that certain devices including wristbands and sensor-based tools, can reliably track sleep patterns and stages, heart rate variability, stress levels, tremors, movement and gait. Such data can help clinicians understand long-term trends in sleep efficiency, stress response or movement changes but they are not diagnostic tools and cannot independently diagnose neurological diseases.
Some emerging technologies such as head-mounted EEG devices are still experimental, Dr. Gupta said, adding that while they are being researched and may hold future promise, their signal quality remains inferior to standard clinical EEG and they are not medically validated.
Dr. Gupta also warned against exaggerated claims. “There is no smartwatch, headband, eye-mounted, ear-mounted or AI-based wearable that can diagnose Alzheimer’s disease, epilepsy, Parkinson’s disease or other brain disorders. Wearables cannot measure brain structure, deep brain function, anatomy, cognition, intelligence, or thought processes, nor can they replace clinical examination, MRI or CT scans, or medical-grade EEG testing. Their most meaningful role, he says, lies in tracking trends and supporting follow-up, particularly for sleep, stress, heart rate variability, and movement disorders.”
Dr. Bipan Sharma, Consultant Neurologist, Kailash Deepak Hospital (New Delhi) acknowledged that we are living in an era of wearable devices powered by AI. “These devices are not only a fashion statement but also help in assessing certain health parameters. Commonly used wearables include smartwatches, wristbands, headbands, earbuds, smart rings, continuous glucose monitoring devices, and infusion pumps.”
On the question of whether these devices can truly help in detecting brain problems, Dr. Sharma said the answer is both “yes and no.” Yes, these devices can help in detecting certain brain problems as they continuously track real-world data that would be difficult to capture during routine clinical neurologist visits and even during testing, he added.
“Commonly, these devices measure variation in heart rate, oxygen saturation level, sleep quality and abnormal body movements like tremors and seizure activity. Changes in these parameters can provide a clue to underlying issues. However, they cannot replace clinical evaluation, EEG, and brain scans. They are best used as a warning tool and not as a diagnostic tool.” Dr. Sharma advised that if these devices show some unusual or abnormal activity, the best course of action is not to panic but to consult a neurologist.
Experts also warn that over-reliance on wearables can create unnecessary anxiety. Dr Krishna said that normal variations in sleep, stress and daily performance are common and constant monitoring can make healthy individuals feel unwell. “Symptoms such as speech difficulty, weakness, loss of consciousness, severe headaches or problems that interfere with daily life require direct medical assessment. Not every sensation needs tracking, and not every person needs continuous monitoring.”
The consensus among neurologists is clear: while wearables can help track trends and support long-term observation, claims that they can diagnose brain diseases or replace medical testing are not scientifically proven. For brain health concerns, expert evaluation and validated medical investigations remain essential.
End of Article