MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980357151 · doi:10.1109/jtehm.2019.2946147

Vision-Based Heart and Respiratory Rate Monitoring During Sleep – A Validation Study for the Population at Risk of Sleep Apnea

2019· article· en· W2980357151 on OpenAlexafffund
Kaiyin Zhu, Michael H. Li, Sina Akbarian, Maziar Hafezi, Azadeh Yadollahi, Babak Taati

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Translational Engineering in Health and Medicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsMuscular Dystrophy CanadaUniversity of TorontoToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity Health Network
FundersFedDev OntarioToronto Rehabilitation Institute
KeywordsRespiratory rateHeart ratePolysomnographyMedicinePulse oximetryApneaSleep apneaMean squared errorHeart rate variabilityRespiratory systemCardiologyAnesthesiaStatisticsMathematicsInternal medicineBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A reliable, accessible, and non-intrusive method for tracking respiratory and heart rate is important for improving monitoring and detection of sleep apnea. In this study, an algorithm based on motion analysis of infrared video recordings was validated in 50 adults referred for clinical overnight polysomnography (PSG). The algorithm tracks the displacements of selected feature points on each sleeping participant and extracts respiratory rate using principal component analysis and heart rate using independent component analysis. For respiratory rate estimation (mean ± standard deviation), 89.89 % ± 10.95 % of the overnight estimation was accurate within 1 breath per minute compared to the PSG-derived respiratory rate from the respiratory inductive plethysmography signal, with an average root mean square error (RMSE) of 2.10 ± 1.64 breaths per minute. For heart rate estimation, 77.97 % ± 18.91 % of the overnight estimation was within 5 beats per minute of the heart rate derived from the pulse oximetry signal from PSG, with mean RMSE of 7.47 ± 4.79 beats per minute. No significant difference in estimation of RMSE of either signal was found according to differences in body position, sleep stage, or amount of the body covered by blankets. This vision-based method may prove suitable for overnight, non-contact monitoring of respiratory rate. However, at present, heart rate monitoring is less reliable and will require further work to improve accuracy.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations49
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Translational Engineering in Health and MedicineSame topicObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchFrench-language works237,207