MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169854632 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2011.2112657

Automated Off-Line Respiratory Event Detection for the Study of Postoperative Apnea in Infants

2011· article· en· W2169854632 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Aoude, Robert E. Kearney, Karen A. Brown, Henrietta L. Galiana

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhonocardiography and Auscultation Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtifact (error)Asynchrony (computer programming)Computer scienceNoise (video)ApneaArtificial intelligenceCardiorespiratory fitnessPattern recognition (psychology)Speech recognitionMedicineAnesthesiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previously, we presented automated methods for thoraco-abdominal asynchrony estimation and movement artifact detection in respiratory inductance plethysmography (RIP) signals. This paper combines and improves these methods to give a method for the automated, off-line detection of pause, movement artifact, and asynchrony. Simulation studies demonstrated that the new combined method is accurate and robust in the presence of noise. The new procedure was successfully applied to cardiorespiratory signals acquired postoperatively from infants in the recovery room. A comparison of the events detected with the automated method to those visually scored by an expert clinician demonstrated a higher agreement (κ = 0.52) than that amongst several human scorers (κ = 0.31) in a clinical study . The method provides the following advantages: first, it is fully automated; second, it is more efficient than visual scoring; third, the analysis is repeatable and standardized; fourth, it provides greater agreement with an expert scorer compared to the agreement between trained scorers; fifth, it is amenable to online detection; and lastly, it is applicable to uncalibrated RIP signals. Examples of applications include respiratory monitoring of postsurgical patients and sleep studies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.627
Threshold uncertainty score0.318

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations21
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicPhonocardiography and Auscultation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207