ArticleScientific reports2021
Design and evaluation of a novel approach to invisible electrocardiography (ECG) in sanitary facilities using polymeric electrodes.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Characterisation of thigh-based electrocardiography (ECG) across different pathologies.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Single-lead Thigh ECG Dataset (tOLIet) with Analysis of BMI Effects on Cardiac Signal Quality.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Morphological Autoencoders for Beat-by-Beat Atrial Fibrillation Detection Using Single-Lead ECG.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Identity Recognition in Sanitary Facilities Using Invisible Electrocardiography.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- System on Chip (SoC) for Invisible Electrocardiography (ECG) Biometrics.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Invisible ECG for High Throughput Screening in eSports.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multiple wearable devices for cardiovascular self-monitoring have been proposed over the years, with growing evidence showing their effectiveness in the detection of pathologies that would otherwise be unnoticed through standard routine exams. In particular, Electrocardiography (ECG) has been an important tool for such purpose. However, wearables have known limitations, chief among which are the need for a voluntary action so that the ECG trace can be taken, battery lifetime, and abandonment. To effectively address these, novel solutions are needed, which has recently paved the way for "invisible" (aka "off-the-person") sensing approaches. In this article we describe the design and experimental evaluation of a system for invisible ECG monitoring at home. For this purpose, a new sensor design was proposed, novel materials have been explored, and a proof-of-concept data collection system was created in the form of a toilet seat, enabling ECG measurements as an extension of the regular use of sanitary facilities, without requiring body-worn devices. In order to evaluate the proposed approach, measurements were performed using our system and a gold standard equipment, involving 10 healthy subjects. For the acquisition of the ECG signals on the toilet seat, polymeric electrodes with different textures were produced and tested. According to the results obtained, some of the textures did not allow the acquisition of signals in all users. However, a pyramidal texture showed the best results in relation to heart rate and ECG waveform morphology. For a texture that has shown 0% signal loss, the mean heart rate difference between the reference and experimental device was - 1.778 ± 4.654 Beats per minute (BPM); in terms of ECG waveform, the best cases present a Pearson correlation coefficient above 0.99.
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.