A PPG-Based Calibration-Free Cuffless Blood Pressure Estimation Method Using Cardiovascular Dynamics
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditional cuff-based sphygmomanometers for measuring blood pressure can be uncomfortable and particularly unsuitable to use during sleep. A proposed alternative method uses dynamic changes in the pulse waveform over short intervals and replaces calibration with information from photoplethysmogram (PPG) morphology to provide a calibration-free approach using a single sensor. Results from 30 patients show a high correlation of 73.64% for systolic blood pressure (SBP) and 77.72% for diastolic blood pressure (DBP) between blood pressure estimated with the PPG morphology features and the calibration method. This suggests that the PPG morphology features could replace the calibration stage for a calibration-free method with similar accuracy. Applying the proposed methodology on 200 patients and testing on 25 new patients resulted in a mean error (ME) of -0.31 mmHg, a standard deviation of error (SDE) of 4.89 mmHg, a mean absolute error (MAE) of 3.32 mmHg for DBP and an ME of -4.02 mmHg, an SDE of 10.40 mmHg, and an MAE of 7.41 mmHg for SBP. These results support the potential for using a PPG signal for calibration-free cuffless blood pressure estimation and improving accuracy by adding information from cardiovascular dynamics to different methods in the cuffless blood pressure monitoring field.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it