The Utilization of Heart Rate Variability for Autonomic Nervous System Assessment in Healthy Pregnant Women: Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The autonomic nervous system (ANS) plays a central role in pregnancy-induced adaptations, and failure in the required adaptations is associated with adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes. Mapping maternal ANS function in healthy pregnancy may help to understand ANS function. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systematically review studies on the use of heart rate variability (HRV) monitoring to measure ANS function during pregnancy and determine whether specific HRV patterns representing normal ANS function have been identified during pregnancy. METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline was used to guide the systematic review. The CINAHL, PubMed, SCOPUS, and Web of Science databases were searched to comprehensively identify articles without a time span limitation. Studies were included if they assessed HRV in healthy pregnant individuals at least once during pregnancy or labor, with or without a comparison group (eg, complicated pregnancy). Quality assessment of the included literature was performed using the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) tool. A narrative synthesis approach was used for data extraction and analysis, as the articles were heterogenous in scope, approaches, methods, and variables assessed, which precluded traditional meta-analysis approaches being used. RESULTS: After full screening, 8 studies met the inclusion criteria. In 88% (7/8) of the studies, HRV was measured using electrocardiogram and operationalized in 3 different ways: linear frequency domain (FD), linear time domain (TD), and nonlinear methods. FD was measured in all (8/8), TD in 75% (6/8), and nonlinear methods in 25% (2/8) of the studies. The assessment duration varied from 5 minutes to 24 hours. TD indexes and most of the FD indexes decreased from the first to the third trimesters in the majority (5/7, 71%) of the studies. Of the FD indexes, low frequency (LF [nu]) and the LF/high frequency (HF) ratio showed an ascending trend from early to late pregnancy, indicating an increase in sympathetic activity toward the end of the pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: We identified 3 HRV operationalization methods along with potentially indicative HRV patterns. However, we found no justification for the selection of measurement tools, measurement time frames, and operationalization methods, which threaten the generalizability and reliability of pattern findings. More research is needed to determine the criteria and methods for determining HRV patterns corresponding to ANS functioning in healthy pregnant persons.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.058 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".