Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16960742›Full record

ArticleMedical & biological engineering & computing2006

Reliability and accuracy of heart rate variability metrics versus ECG segment duration.

James McNames, Mateo Aboy

Abstract readValidation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Medical & biological engineering & computing, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. A reporting checklist for human and animal heart rate variability research.Pflugers Archiv : European journal of physiology · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Baseline heart rate variability predicts placebo hypoalgesia in men, but not women.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

James McNamesElectrical and Computer Engineering, Portland State University, P.O. Box 751, Portland, OR 97207-0751, USA. mcnames@pdx.edu
Mateo Aboy

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the exponential growth in heart rate variability (HRV) research, the reproducibility and reliability of HRV metrics continues to be debated. We estimated the reliability of 11 metrics calculated from 5 min records. We also compared the accuracy of the HRV metrics calculated from ECG records spanning 10 s to 10 min as compared with the metrics calculated from 5 min records. The mean heart rate was more reproducible and could be more accurately estimated from very short segments (<1 min) than any of the other HRV metrics. HRV metrics that effectively highpass filter the R-R interval series were more reliable than the other metrics and could be more accurately estimated from very short segments. This indicates that most of the HRV is caused by drift and nonstationary effects. Metrics that are sensitive to low frequency components of HRV have poor repeatability and cannot be estimated accurately from short segments (<10 min).

Indexed as

Heart RateSignal Processing, Computer-AssistedAdultAgedDatabases as TopicElectrocardiographyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.