Diagnostic Value of Synchronous Heart Sound Electrocardiogram in Children with Postural Tachycardia Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fengling Zhang,1 Yonglin Chen,2 Li Zhang,2 Bo Hu,3 Zhaotang Lin,1 Muqing Niu,1 Shupei Ding,1 Fang Jiang,1 Jinyong Pan2 1Department of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Shihezi University, Shihezi, Xinjiang, People’s Republic of China; 2Department of Pediatrics, First Affiliated Hospital of Shihezi University School of Medicine, Shihezi, Xinjiang, People’s Republic of China; 3Department of Interventional Radiology, First Affiliated Hospital of Shihezi University School of Medicine, Shihezi, Xinjiang, People’s Republic of ChinaCorrespondence: Jinyong Pan, Department of Pediatrics, First Affiliated Hospital of Shihezi University School of Medicine, Shihezi, Xinjiang, People’s Republic of China, Email 63620441@qq.comBackground: Postural tachycardia syndrome (POTS) is a common autonomic dysfunction in children. The head-up test (HUT) or head-up tilt test (HUTT) is typically required to confirm the diagnosis of POTS. This study describes a novel approach to diagnosing POTS in children by simultaneous measurement and analysis of heart sounds and electrocardiogram (ECG) signals using a wearable device.Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic value of synchronous heart sound and ECG monitoring in identifying POTS in children.Methods: This study included a total of 50 children. Twenty-five children with POTS were admitted to the hospital with symptoms of syncope or orthostatic intolerance, while twenty-five children who came to the hospital for a health checkup were included as the control group. All children underwent synchronous phonocardiography and ECG monitoring with wearable devices to simultaneously record heart sounds and ECG signals. Wavelet analysis was used to automatically analyze heart sounds and ECG signals to determine the Electromechanical Activity Time (EMAT).Results: In the POTS group, EMAT decreased significantly from supine to upright position (75.71 ± 9.16 ms vs 70.90 ± 10.86 ms, P = 0.0051), while the change in the control group was not significant (58.92 ± 4.10 ms vs 55.50 ± 9.89 ms, P = 0.100). The difference in EMAT change (upright-supine) was significantly greater in the POTS group (3.39± 5.91 ms) than in controls (0.58 ± 5.70 ms, P = 0.038).Precision–recall curve (PRC) analysis demonstrated that the average precision (AP) for EMAT in the supine position was 0.84, while the AP for the upright position was 0.88.Conclusion: Simultaneous heart sound and ECG analysis using a wearable device is a simple, noninvasive approach that aids in the diagnosis of pediatric POTS. EMAT serves as a valuable discriminative marker between patient groups.Keywords: cardiac function, electromechanical activity time, postural tachycardia syndrome, heart sounds and ECG, wearable cardiac devices
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".