MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2519059642 · doi:10.1038/srep31297

Ballistocardiogram: Mechanism and Potential for Unobtrusive Cardiovascular Health Monitoring

2016· article· en· W2519059642 on OpenAlexafffund
Chang‐Sei Kim, Stephanie L. Ober, M. Sean McMurtry, Barry A. Finegan, Omer T. Inan, Ramakrishna Mukkamala, Jin‐Oh Hahn

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Institutes of HealthHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsBallistocardiographyMechanism (biology)Cardiovascular healthMedicineBlood pressureWaveformCardiologyAcousticsComputer scienceInternal medicineDiseasePhysicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For more than a century, it has been known that the body recoils each time the heart ejects blood into the arteries. These subtle cardiogenic body movements have been measured with increasingly convenient ballistocardiography (BCG) instruments over the years. A typical BCG measurement shows several waves, most notably the "I", "J", and "K" waves. However, the mechanism for the genesis of these waves has remained elusive. We formulated a simple mathematical model of the BCG waveform. We showed that the model could predict the BCG waves as well as physiologic timings and amplitudes of the major waves. The validated model reveals that the principal mechanism for the genesis of the BCG waves is blood pressure gradients in the ascending and descending aorta. This new mechanistic insight may be exploited to allow BCG to realize its potential for unobtrusive monitoring and diagnosis of cardiovascular health and disease.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 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

Citations190
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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