MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977164864 · doi:10.1109/memea.2013.6549697

Evaluation of the correlation between blood pressure and pulse transit time

2013· article· en· W1977164864 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaochuan He, Rafik Goubran, Peter Liu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotoplethysmogramBlood pressureCuffSIGNAL (programming language)MedicineCorrelationBiomedical engineeringCardiologyPulse (music)DiastoleInternal medicineComputer scienceMathematicsSurgeryTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The arterial blood pressure is an essential physiological parameter for health monitoring. Most blood measurement devices determine the systolic and diastolic arterial blood pressure through the inflation and the deflation of a cuff. This method is uncomfortable to the user and may cause anxiety which in turns can affect the blood pressure (white coat syndrome). This paper investigates a cuff-less non-intrusive approach to measure arterial blood pressure that is suitable for continuous measurement. The approach is based on measuring the delay between the R-peak of the electrocardiogram (ECG) signal and the peaks of the finger photoplethysmograph (PPG) signal. The results of this paper show a high correlation between the blood pressure and the pulse transit time (PTT). Different polynomial regressions are applied for further estimation. The paper uses actual ECG, PPG and blood pressure measurements extracted from the MIMIC database that contains clinical signal data reflecting real measurements. The simulation results verify that the delay (PTT) between the R-peak of the ECG signal and the peaks of the finger PPG signal have a high correlation with arterial blood pressure and can be used as an indicator of the arterial blood pressure.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.194 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations49
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNon-Invasive Vital Sign MonitoringFrench-language works237,207