MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994053604 · doi:10.2196/14857

Use of a Smart Watch for Early Detection of Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: Validation Study

2019· article· en· W2994053604 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Cardio · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotoplethysmogramAtrial fibrillationMedicineHeart rateCardiologyElectrocardiographyInternal medicineHeart RhythmHeart rate variabilityPulse (music)Wearable computerHeart rate monitorComputer scienceWirelessBlood pressureTelecommunicationsEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Wearable devices with photoplethysmography (PPG) technology can be useful for detecting paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF), which often goes uncaptured despite being a leading cause of stroke. Objective This study is the first part of a 2-phase study that aimed at developing a method for immediate detection of paroxysmal AF using PPG-integrated wearable devices. In this study, the diagnostic performance of 2 major smart watches, Apple Watch Series 3 and Fitbit (FBT) Charge HR Wireless Activity Wristband, each equipped with a PPG sensor, was compared, and the pulse rate data outputted from those devices were analyzed for precision and accuracy in reference to the heart rate data from electrocardiography (ECG) during AF. Methods A total of 40 subjects from patients who underwent cardiac surgery at a single center between September 2017 and March 2018 were monitored for postoperative AF using telemetric ECG and PPG devices. AF was diagnosed using a 12-lead ECG by qualified physicians. Each subject was given a pair of smart watches, Apple Watch and FBT, for simultaneous pulse rate monitoring. The heart rate of all subjects was also recorded on the telemetry system. Time series pulse rate trends and heart rate trends were created and analyzed for trend pattern similarities. Those trend data were then used to determine the accuracy of PPG-based pulse rate measurements in reference to ECG-based heart rate measurements during AF. Results Of the 20 AF events in group FBT, 6 (30%) showed a moderate or higher correlation (cross-correlation function>0.40) between pulse rate trend patterns and heart rate trend patterns. Of the 16 AF events in group Apple Watch (workout [W] mode), 12 (75%) showed a moderate or higher correlation between the 2 trend patterns. Linear regression analyses also showed a significant correlation between the pulse rates and the heart rates during AF in the subjects with Apple Watch. This correlation was not observed with FBT. The regression formula for Apple Watch W mode and FBT was X=14.203 + 0.841Y and X=58.225 + 0.228Y, respectively (where X denotes the mean of all average pulse rates during AF and Y denotes the mean of all corresponding average heart rates during AF), and the coefficient of determination (R2) was 0.685 and 0.057, respectively (P<.001 and .29, respectively). Conclusions In this validation study, the detection precision of AF and measurement accuracy during AF were both better with Apple Watch W mode than with FBT.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.438
Threshold uncertainty score0.435

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.222 · 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