MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186211236 · doi:10.2196/27765

Validation of Heart Rate Extracted From Wrist-Based Photoplethysmography in the Perioperative Setting: Prospective Observational Study

2021· article· en· W3186211236 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 · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRijksdienst voor Ondernemend NederlandITEA
KeywordsPhotoplethysmogramMedicineHeart ratePerioperativeLimits of agreementGold standard (test)WristAnesthesiaCardiologySurgeryBlood pressureInternal medicineNuclear medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Measurement of heart rate (HR) through an unobtrusive, wrist-worn optical HR monitor (OHRM) could enable earlier recognition of patient deterioration in low acuity settings and enable timely intervention. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to assess the agreement between the HR extracted from the OHRM and the gold standard 5-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) connected to a patient monitor during surgery and in the recovery period. METHODS: In patients undergoing surgery requiring anesthesia, the HR reported by the patient monitor's ECG module was recorded and stored simultaneously with the photopletysmography (PPG) from the OHRM attached to the patient's wrist. The agreement between the HR reported by the patient's monitor and the HR extracted from the OHRM's PPG signal was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis during the surgical and recovery phase. RESULTS: A total of 271.8 hours of data in 99 patients was recorded simultaneously by the OHRM and patient monitor. The median coverage was 86% (IQR 65%-95%) and did not differ significantly between surgery and recovery (Wilcoxon paired difference test P=.17). Agreement analysis showed the limits of agreement (LoA) of the difference between the OHRM and the ECG HR were within the range of 5 beats per minute (bpm). The mean bias was -0.14 bpm (LoA between -3.08 bpm and 2.79 bpm) and -0.19% (LoA between -5 bpm to 5 bpm) for the PPG- measured HR compared to the ECG-measured HR during surgery; during recovery, it was -0.11 bpm (LoA between -2.79 bpm and 2.59 bpm) and -0.15% (LoA between -3.92% and 3.64%). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that an OHRM equipped with a PPG sensor can measure HR within the ECG reference standard of -5 bpm to 5 bpm or -10% to 10% in the perioperative setting when the PPG signal is of sufficient quality. This implies that an OHRM can be considered clinically acceptable for HR monitoring in low acuity hospitalized patients.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.149
Threshold uncertainty score0.575

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.245 · 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