MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3044496807 · doi:10.2196/15331

Usability of Wearable Devices With a Novel Cardiac Force Index for Estimating the Dynamic Cardiac Function: Observational Study

2020· article· en· W3044496807 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Po-Jen Hsiao, Chih-Chien Chiu, Ke-Hsin Lin, Fu-Kang Hu, Pei-Jan Tsai, Chun-Ting Wu, Yuan-Kai Pang, Yu Lin, Ming-Hao Kuo, Kang‐Hua Chen, Yi‐Syuan Wu, Hao-Yi Wu, Ya-Ting Chang, Yu-Tien Chang, Chia-Shiang Cheng, Chih‐Pin Chuu, Fu‐Huang Lin, Chi‐Wen Chang, Yuan-Kuei Li, Jenq-Shyong Chan, Chi‐Ming Chu

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Effects of Exercise
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTri-Service General HospitalChang Gung Medical FoundationMedical Affairs BureauChang Gung University
KeywordsWaistCircumferenceHeart rateWearable computerCardiac function curveSimulationPhysical therapyMedicineStatisticsComputer scienceCardiologyBody mass indexMathematicsInternal medicineBlood pressureHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Long-distance running can be a form of stress to the heart. Technological improvements combined with the public's gradual turn toward mobile health (mHealth), self-health, and exercise effectiveness have resulted in the widespread use of wearable exercise products. The monitoring of dynamic cardiac function changes during running and running performance should be further studied. OBJECTIVE: We investigated the relationship between dynamic cardiac function changes and finish time for 3000-meter runs. Using a wearable device based on a novel cardiac force index (CFI), we explored potential correlations among 3000-meter runners with stronger and weaker cardiac functions during running. METHODS: This study used the American product BioHarness 3.0 (Zephyr Technology Corporation), which can measure basic physiological parameters including heart rate, respiratory rate, temperature, maximum oxygen consumption, and activity. We investigated the correlations among new physiological parameters, including CFI = weight * activity / heart rate, cardiac force ratio (CFR) = CFI of running / CFI of walking, and finish times for 3000-meter runs. RESULTS: The results showed that waist circumference, smoking, and CFI were the significant factors for qualifying in the 3000-meter run. The prediction model was as follows: ln (3000 meters running performance pass probability / fail results probability) = -2.702 - 0.096 × [waist circumference] - 1.827 × [smoke] + 0.020 × [ACi7]. If smoking and the ACi7 were controlled, contestants with a larger waist circumference tended to fail the qualification based on the formula above. If waist circumference and ACi7 were controlled, smokers tended to fail more often than nonsmokers. Finally, we investigated a new calculation method for monitoring cardiac status during exercise that uses the CFI of walking for the runner as a reference to obtain the ratio between the cardiac force of exercise and that of walking (CFR) to provide a standard for determining if the heart is capable of exercise. A relationship is documented between the CFR and the performance of 3000-meter runs in a healthy 22-year-old person. During the running period, data are obtained while participant slowly runs 3000 meters, and the relationship between the CFR and time is plotted. The runner's CFR varies with changes in activity. Since the runner's acceleration increases, the CFR quickly increases to an explosive peak, indicating the runner's explosive power. At this period, the CFI revealed a 3-fold increase (CFR=3) in a strong heart. After a time lapse, the CFR is approximately 2.5 during an endurance period until finishing the 3000-meter run. Similar correlation is found in a runner with a weak heart, with the CFR at the beginning period being 4 and approximately 2.5 thereafter. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the study results suggested that measuring the real-time CFR changes could be used in a prediction model for 3000-meter running performance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicCardiovascular Effects of ExerciseFrench-language works237,207