MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3045255701 · doi:10.2196/18715

Machine Learning Model Based on Transthoracic Bioimpedance and Heart Rate Variability for Lung Fluid Accumulation Detection: Prospective Clinical Study

2020· article· en· W3045255701 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nataša Reljin, Hugo F. Posada–Quintero, Caitlin Eaton-Robb, Sophia Binici, Emily Ensom, Eric Ding, Anna Hayes, Jarno Riistama, Chad E. Darling, David D. McManus, Ki H. Chon

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Science Foundation
KeywordsHeart failureHeart rate variabilityCardiologyHeart rateMedicineInternal medicineBiomedical engineeringBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Accumulation of excess body fluid and autonomic dysregulation are clinically important characteristics of acute decompensated heart failure. We hypothesized that transthoracic bioimpedance, a noninvasive, simple method for measuring fluid retention in lungs, and heart rate variability, an assessment of autonomic function, can be used for detection of fluid accumulation in patients with acute decompensated heart failure. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the performance of transthoracic bioimpedance and heart rate variability parameters obtained using a fluid accumulation vest with carbon black-polydimethylsiloxane dry electrodes in a prospective clinical study (System for Heart Failure Identification Using an External Lung Fluid Device; SHIELD). METHODS: We computed 15 parameters: 8 were calculated from the model to fit Cole-Cole plots from transthoracic bioimpedance measurements (extracellular, intracellular, intracellular-extracellular difference, and intracellular-extracellular parallel circuit resistances as well as fitting error, resonance frequency, tissue heterogeneity, and cellular membrane capacitance), and 7 were based on linear (mean heart rate, low-frequency components of heart rate variability, high-frequency components of heart rate variability, normalized low-frequency components of heart rate variability, normalized high-frequency components of heart rate variability) and nonlinear (principal dynamic mode index of sympathetic function, and principal dynamic mode index of parasympathetic function) analysis of heart rate variability. We compared the values of these parameters between 3 participant data sets: control (n=32, patients who did not have heart failure), baseline (n=23, patients with acute decompensated heart failure taken at the time of admittance to the hospital), and discharge (n=17, patients with acute decompensated heart failure taken at the time of discharge from hospital). We used several machine learning approaches to classify participants with fluid accumulation (baseline) and without fluid accumulation (control and discharge), termed with fluid and without fluid groups, respectively. RESULTS: : P=.001), indicating that a higher volume of fluids accumulated in the lungs of patients with heart failure. A cubic support vector machine model using the 5 parameters achieved an accuracy of 92% for with fluid and without fluid group classification. The transthoracic bioimpedance parameters were related to intra- and extracellular fluid, whereas the heart rate variability parameters were mostly related to sympathetic activation. CONCLUSIONS: This is useful, for instance, for an in-home diagnostic wearable to detect fluid accumulation. Results suggest that fluid accumulation, and subsequently acute decompensated heart failure detection, could be performed using transthoracic bioimpedance and heart rate variability measurements acquired with a wearable vest.

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)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.356 · 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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicHemodynamic Monitoring and TherapyFrench-language works237,207