ArticleJournal of electrocardiology
A method to extract realistic artifacts from electrocardiogram recordings for robust algorithm testing.
Article in Journal of electrocardiology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical Evaluation of the ECG Noise Extraction Tool as a Component of ECG Analysis Algorithms Evaluation.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2025Article
- Wireless, Portable Fiber Bragg Grating Interrogation System Employing Optical Edge Filter.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveRecordings of signal noise and artifacts can be added to clean electrocardiogram (ECG) records to assess the performance of ECG and arrhythmia analysis algorithms in the presence of noise. We present a method to estimate device-specific signal noise and artifacts from ECG records. This method can be applied to obtain noise estimates from healthy subjects on any ECG lead, allowing a simple device-specific recording. The proposed approach is assessed using the MIT-BIH Noise Stress Test Database recordings combined with simulated ECGs.
methodsThe proposed noise-estimation method is based on the subtraction of a time-aligned median beat from a noisy ECG recording. To test our method, electrode motion and muscle artifact noise from MIT-BIH Noise Stress Test database were added to simulated ECG signals at signal-noise ratios (SNR) from -6 to 20 dB. A comparison between noise and estimated noise signal statistical characteristics was made including root-mean squared error and assessment of the power content in three frequency bands (cardiac [0.5-5 Hz], mid [5-25 Hz], and high [25-40 Hz]).
resultsVisual assessment and frequency analysis demonstrate the good quality of noise estimation. Root-mean squared error between noise and estimated noise signals was <0.5 Normalized Units across all SNR levels. Band power error was stable across SNR levels with median percentage error between noise and estimate noise signals of <10% for cardiac and mid frequency bands.
conclusionEstimating noise from ECG records is a viable approach to generate noise and artifacts-only signals. These signals are device-specific and easy to collect from healthy subjects without requiring special electrode set-ups. Therefore, they may be suitable for use with annotated ECG databases to assess the robustness of ECG analysis algorithms in the presence of noise.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.