MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400236926 · doi:10.2196/56547

Feasibility of Monitoring Heart and Respiratory Rates Using Nonwearable Devices and Consistency of the Measured Parameters: Pilot Feasibility Study

2024· article· en· W4400236926 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kasumi Ikuta, Miya Aishima, Maiko Noguchi‐Watanabe, Sakiko Fukui

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Human Factors · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConsistency (knowledge bases)MedicineRespiratory monitoringStatisticsComputer scienceRespiratory systemMathematicsInternal medicineArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: As Japan is the world's fastest-aging society with a declining population, it is challenging to secure human resources for care providers. Therefore, the Japanese government is promoting digital transformation and the use of nursing care equipment, including nonwearable devices that monitor heart and respiratory rates. However, the feasibility of monitoring heart and respiratory rates with nonwearable devices and the consistency of the rates measured have not been reported. Objective: In this study, we focused on a sheet-type nonwearable device (Safety Sheep Sensor) introduced in many nursing homes. We evaluated the feasibility of monitoring heart rate (HR) and respiratory rate (RR) continuously using nonwearable devices and the consistency of the HR and RR measured. Methods: A sheet-type nonwearable device that measured HR and RR every minute through body vibrations was placed under the mattress of each participant. The participants in study 1 were healthy individuals aged 20-60 years (n=21), while those in study 2 were older adults living in multidwelling houses and required nursing care (n=20). The HR was measured using standard methods by the nurse and using the wearable device (Silmee Bar-type Lite sensor), and RR was measured by the nurse. The primary outcome was the mean difference in HR and RR between nonwearable devices and standard methods. Results: The mean difference in HR was -0.32 (SD 3.12) in study 1 and 0.04 (SD: 3.98) in study 2; both the differences were within the predefined accepted discrepancies (<5 beats/min). The mean difference in RR was -0.98 (SD 3.01) in study 1 and -0.49 (SD 2.40) in study 2; both the differences were within the predefined accepted discrepancies (3 breaths/min). Conclusions: HR and RR measurements obtained using the nonwearable devices and the standard method were similar. Continuous monitoring of vital signs using nonwearable devices can aid in the early detection of abnormal conditions in older people.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.206
Threshold uncertainty score0.812

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.159
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Human FactorsSame topicNon-Invasive Vital Sign MonitoringFrench-language works237,207