Unexpected sawtooth artifact in beat-to-beat pulse transit time measured from patient monitor data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECT: It is increasingly popular to collect as much data as possible in the hospital setting from clinical monitors for research purposes. However, in this setup the data calibration issue is often not discussed and, rather, implicitly assumed, while the clinical monitors might not be designed for the data analysis purpose. We hypothesize that this calibration issue for a secondary analysis may become an important source of artifacts in patient monitor data. We test an off-the-shelf integrated photoplethysmography (PPG) and electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring device for its ability to yield a reliable pulse transit time (PTT) signal. APPROACH: This is a retrospective clinical study using two databases: one containing 35 subjects who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy, another containing 22 subjects who underwent spontaneous breathing test in the intensive care unit. All data sets include recordings of PPG and ECG using a commonly deployed patient monitor. We calculated the PTT signal offline. MAIN RESULTS: We report a novel constant oscillatory pattern in the PTT signal and identify this pattern as a sawtooth artifact. We apply an approach based on the de-shape method to visualize, quantify and validate this sawtooth artifact. SIGNIFICANCE: The PPG and ECG signals not designed for the PTT evaluation may contain unwanted artifacts. The PTT signal should be calibrated before analysis to avoid erroneous interpretation of its physiological meaning.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".