MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200197582 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-055209

Neonatal heart rate variability: a contemporary scoping review of analysis methods and clinical applications

2021· article· en· W4200197582 on OpenAlex
Samantha Latremouille, Justin Lam, Wissam Shalish, Guilherme SantʼAnna

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
KeywordsMedicineHeart rate variabilitySample size determinationPopulationMeta-analysisMEDLINEPathologicalCochrane LibraryWeb of scienceHeart ratePediatricsInternal medicineStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Neonatal heart rate variability (HRV) is widely used as a research tool. However, HRV calculation methods are highly variable making it difficult for comparisons between studies. OBJECTIVES: To describe the different types of investigations where neonatal HRV was used, study characteristics, and types of analyses performed. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Human neonates ≤1 month of corrected age. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: A protocol and search strategy of the literature was developed in collaboration with the McGill University Health Center's librarians and articles were obtained from searches in the Biosis, Cochrane, Embase, Medline and Web of Science databases published between 1 January 2000 and 1 July 2020. CHARTING METHODS: A single reviewer screened for eligibility and data were extracted from the included articles. Information collected included the study characteristics and population, type of HRV analysis used (time domain, frequency domain, non-linear, heart rate characteristics (HRC) parameters) and clinical applications (physiological and pathological conditions, responses to various stimuli and outcome prediction). RESULTS: Of the 286 articles included, 171 (60%) were small single centre studies (sample size <50) performed on term infants (n=136). There were 138 different types of investigations reported: physiological investigations (n=162), responses to various stimuli (n=136), pathological conditions (n=109) and outcome predictor (n=30). Frequency domain analyses were used in 210 articles (73%), followed by time domain (n=139), non-linear methods (n=74) or HRC analyses (n=25). Additionally, over 60 different measures of HRV were reported; in the frequency domain analyses alone there were 29 different ranges used for the low frequency band and 46 for the high frequency band. CONCLUSIONS: Neonatal HRV has been used in diverse types of investigations with significant lack of consistency in analysis methods applied. Specific guidelines for HRV analyses in neonates are needed to allow for comparisons between studies.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.519
Threshold uncertainty score0.562

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.550
Teacher spread0.370 · 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