MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092095656 · doi:10.1109/jtehm.2020.3029690

Quantification of Resting-State Ballistocardiogram Difference Between Clinical and Non-Clinical Populations for Ambient Monitoring of Heart Failure

2020· article· en· W3092095656 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Translational Engineering in Health and Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityInstitute of AgingResearch Institute for AgingMcGill UniversityMount Sinai HospitalToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of WaterlooUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
FundersScience and Engineering Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAGE-WELL
KeywordsSittingHeart failurePopulationMetric (unit)Resting state fMRIMedicineCohortBallistocardiographySIGNAL (programming language)Computer scienceStatisticsCardiologyPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsPathologyRadiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A ballistocardiogram (BCG) is a versatile bio-signal that enables ambient remote monitoring of heart failure (HF) patients in a home setting, achieved through embedded sensors in the surrounding environment. Numerous methods of analysis are available for extracting physiological information using the BCG; however, most have been developed based on non-clinical subjects. While the difference between clinical and non-clinical populations are expected, quantification of the difference may serve as a useful tool. In this work, the differences in resting-state BCGs of the two cohorts in a sitting posture were quantified. An instrumented chair was used to collect the BCG from 29 healthy adults and 26 NYHA HF class I and II patients while seated without any stress test for five minutes. Five 20-second epochs per subject were used to calculate the waveform fluctuation metric at rest (WFMR). The WFMR was obtained in two steps. The ensemble average of the segmented BCG heartbeats within an epoch were calculated first. Mean square errors (MSE) between different ensemble average pairs were then retrieved. The MSEs were averaged to produce the WFMR. The comparison showed that the clinical cohort had higher fluctuation than the non-clinical population and had at least 82.2% separation, suggesting that greater errors may result when existing algorithms were used. The WFMR acts as a bridge that may enable important features, including the addition of error margins in parameter estimation and ways to devise a calibration strategy when resting-state BCG is unstable.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.198
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.260 · 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