MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898457169 · doi:10.3390/bios8040101

Photoplethysmography and Deep Learning: Enhancing Hypertension Risk Stratification

2018· article· en· W2898457169 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiosensors · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotoplethysmogramBlood pressureMedicinePrehypertensionArtificial intelligenceCardiologyInternal medicineComputer scienceFilter (signal processing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Blood pressure is a basic physiological parameter in the cardiovascular circulatory system. Long-term abnormal blood pressure will lead to various cardiovascular diseases, making the early detection and assessment of hypertension profoundly significant for the prevention and treatment of cardiovascular diseases. In this paper, we investigate whether or not deep learning can provide better results for hypertension risk stratification when compared to the classical signal processing and feature extraction methods. We tested a deep learning method for the classification and evaluation of hypertension using photoplethysmography (PPG) signals based on the continuous wavelet transform (using Morse) and pretrained convolutional neural network (using GoogLeNet). We collected 121 data recordings from the Multiparameter Intelligent Monitoring in Intensive Care (MIMIC) Database, each containing arterial blood pressure (ABP) and photoplethysmography (PPG) signals. The ABP signals were utilized to extract blood pressure category labels, and the PPG signals were used to train and test the model. According to the seventh report of the Joint National Committee, blood pressure levels are categorized as normotension (NT), prehypertension (PHT), and hypertension (HT). For the early diagnosis and assessment of HT, the timely detection of PHT and the accurate diagnosis of HT are significant. Therefore, three HT classification trials were set: NT vs. PHT, NT vs. HT, and (NT + PHT) vs. HT. The F-scores of these three classification trials were 80.52%, 92.55%, and 82.95%, respectively. The tested deep method achieved higher accuracy for hypertension risk stratification when compared to the classical signal processing and feature extraction method. Additionally, the method achieved comparable results to another approach that requires electrocardiogram and PPG signals.

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.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.586

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.189 · 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