Feasibility of Using a Single Heart Rate–Based Measure for Real-time Feedback in a Voluntary Deep Breathing App for Children: Data Collection and Algorithm Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Deep diaphragmatic breathing, also called belly breathing, is a popular behavioral intervention that helps children cope with anxiety, stress, and their experience of pain. Combining physiological monitoring with accessible mobile technology can motivate children to comply with this intervention through biofeedback and gaming. These innovative technologies have the potential to improve patient experience and compliance with strategies that reduce anxiety, change the experience of pain, and enhance self-regulation during distressing medical procedures. Objective The aim of this paper was to describe a simple biofeedback method for quantifying breathing compliance in a mobile smartphone app. Methods A smartphone app was developed that combined pulse oximetry with an animated protocol for paced deep breathing. We collected photoplethysmogram data during spontaneous and subsequently paced deep breathing in children. Two measures, synchronized respiratory sinus arrhythmia (RSAsync) and the corresponding relative synchronized inspiration/expiration heart rate ratio (HR-I:Esync), were extracted from the photoplethysmogram. Results Data collected from 80 children aged 5-17 years showed a positive RSAsync effect in all participants during paced deep breathing, with a median (IQR; range) HR-I:Esync ratio of 1.26 (1.16-1.35; 1.01-1.60) during paced deep breathing compared to 0.98 (0.96-1.02; 0.82-1.18) during spontaneous breathing (median difference 0.25, 95% CI 0.23-0.30; P<.001). The measured HR-I:Esync values appeared to be independent of age. Conclusions An HR-I:Esync level of 1.1 was identified as an age-independent threshold for programming the breathing pattern for optimal compliance in biofeedback.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".