Noninvasive validation of central and peripheral augmentation index estimated by a novel wrist-worn tonometer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The validation of new blood pressure devices with easier use and more rapid data collection may facilitate the incorporation of these measures into clinical practice. We analyze the reliability and validity of Pulse Wave Analysis as reported by a novel wrist-worn device, easy and quick to use, comparing central and peripheral augmentation index (AIx) with the same measures from the SphygmoCor. Additionally, we analyzed clinical relevance through the association of the Pulse Wave Analysis, as reported by a novel wrist-worn device, with other cardiovascular parameters. METHODS: Cross-sectional study including 254 participants. Mean age was 51.9 ± 13.4 years and 53% were women. MEASUREMENTS: peripheral AIx (PAIx) and central AIx (CAIx) by the wrist-worn device and SphygmoCor (MM3); carotid-femoral (cf) pulse wave velocity (PWV) by SphygmoCor (MM3); cardioankle-vascular index (CAVI), ankle-brachial index (ABI) and brachial-ankle (ba) PWV by the Vasera device and carotid-intima media thickness (IMT) by ultrasonography. RESULTS: Intra-observer intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) for PAIx was 0.886 (95% CI 0.803-0.934) and for CAIx 0.943 (95% CI 0.901-0.968) with Bland Altman limits of agreement -0.75 (-23.8 to 21.8) and 0.08 (-15.7 to 15.9), respectively. Inter-observer ICC for PAIx was 0.952 (95% CI 0.915-0.972) and CAIx 0.893 (95% CI 0.811-0.939) with limits of agreement -0.45 (-13.7 to 12.8) and 0.43 (-17.7 to 18.5), respectively. Comparing the wrist-worn device with SphygmoCor, the ICC was 0.849 (95% CI 0.798-0.887) for PAIx, and 0.783 (95% CI 0.711-0.838) for CAIx. In Bland-Altman, limits of agreement for PAIx 1.03 (-20.67 to 22.73), and for CAIx -2.14 (-24.79 to 20.50). PAIx and CAIx, from the wrist-worn device, correlated with age, CAVI, ABI, baPWV, cfPWV, IMT, glomerular filtration and cardiovascular risk. CONCLUSION: AIx measurements by wrist-worn device shows a good intra-observer and inter-observer reliability, inter-device noninvasive reliability and validity when compared with SphygmoCor, and clinical relevance by association with measures of vascular structure and function, end-organ damage and cardiovascular risk. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02623894; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02623894.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".