Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22207635›Full record

ArticleIEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering2012

An improved method for the estimation and visualization of velocity fields from gastric high-resolution electrical mapping.

Niranchan Paskaranandavadivel, Gregory O'Grady, Peng Du, Andrew J Pullan, Leo K Cheng

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing 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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Influence of isoflurane and propofol on gastric slow wave patterns and pacing efficacy in pigs.American journal of physiology. Gastrointestinal and liver physiology · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Gastric ablation as a novel technique for modulating electrical conduction in the in vivo stomach.American journal of physiology. Gastrointestinal and liver physiology · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Time-Delay Mapping of High-Resolution Gastric Slow-Wave Activity.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2017
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Characterization of Electrophysiological Propagation by Multichannel Sensors.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2016
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

5 authors.

Niranchan PaskaranandavadivelAuckland Bioengineering Institute, The University of Auckland, Auckland 1010, New Zealand. npas004@aucklanduni.ac.nz
Gregory O'Grady
Peng Du
Andrew J Pullan
Leo K Cheng

Funding

Realistic models of gastrointestinal bioelectromagnetismR01DK064775 · NIDDK · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI CHENG, LEO · 2004 to 2014
$2.6M
NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK064775NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK64775
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

High-resolution (HR) electrical mapping is an important clinical research tool for understanding normal and abnormal gastric electrophysiology. Analyzing velocities of gastric electrical activity in a reliable and accurate manner can provide additional valuable information for quantitatively and qualitatively comparing features across and within subjects, particularly during gastric dysrhythmias. In this study, we compared three methods of estimating velocities from HR recordings to determine which method was the most reliable for use with gastric HR electrical mapping. The three methods were 1) simple finite difference (FD) 2) smoothed finite difference (FDSM), and 3) a polynomial-based method. With synthetic data, the accuracy of the simple FD method resulted in velocity errors almost twice that of the FDSM and the polynomial-based method, in the presence of activation time error up to 0.5 s. With three synthetic cases under various noise types and levels, the FDSM resulted in average speed error of 3.2% and an average angle error of 2.0° and the polynomial-based method had an average speed error of 3.3% and an average angle error of 1.7°. With experimental gastric slow wave recordings performed in pigs, the three methods estimated similar velocities (6.3-7.3 mm/s), but the FDSM method had a lower standard deviation in its velocity estimate than the simple FD and the polynomial-based method, leading it to be the method of choice for velocity estimation in gastric slow wave propagation. An improved method for visualizing velocity fields is also presented.

Indexed as

Electrophysiological PhenomenaAlgorithmsAnimalsMuscle ContractionMuscle, SmoothReproducibility of ResultsSignal Processing, Computer-AssistedStomachSwine

Identifiers

PMID22207635
PMCPMC4106919

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.