Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33839851›Full record

ArticleActa neurochirurgica. Supplement2021

DeepClean: Self-Supervised Artefact Rejection for Intensive Care Waveform Data Using Deep Generative Learning.

Tom Edinburgh, Peter Smielewski, Marek Czosnyka, Manuel Cabeleira, Stephen J Eglen, Ari Ercole

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Acta neurochirurgica. Supplement, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Neurocritical Care: Bench to Bedside (Eds. Claude Hemphill, Michael James) Integrating and Using Big Data in Neurocritical Care.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2020
    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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Tom EdinburghDepartment of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. te269@cam.ac.uk.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3599-7133
Peter SmielewskiBrain Physics, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5096-3938
Marek CzosnykaBrain Physics, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2446-8006
Manuel CabeleiraBrain Physics, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1710-6544
Stephen J EglenDepartment of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8607-8025
Ari ErcoleDivision of Anaesthesia, Department of Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8350-8093
MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Waveform physiological data are important in the treatment of critically ill patients in the intensive care unit. Such recordings are susceptible to artefacts, which must be removed before the data can be reused for alerting or reprocessed for other clinical or research purposes. Accurate removal of artefacts reduces bias and uncertainty in clinical assessment, as well as the false positive rate of ICU alarms, and is therefore a key component in providing optimal clinical care. In this work, we present DeepClean, a prototype self-supervised artefact detection system using a convolutional variational autoencoder deep neural network that avoids costly and painstaking manual annotation, requiring only easily obtained 'good' data for training. For a test case with invasive arterial blood pressure, we demonstrate that our algorithm can detect the presence of an artefact within a 10s sample of data with sensitivity and specificity around 90%. Furthermore, DeepClean was able to identify regions of artefacts within such samples with high accuracy, and we show that it significantly outperforms a baseline principal component analysis approach in both signal reconstruction and artefact detection. DeepClean learns a generative model and therefore may also be used for imputation of missing data.

Indexed as

ArtifactsAlgorithmsCritical CareHumansArtefact detectionArterial blood pressureDeep generative modelsPhysiological waveformsVariational autoencoder

Identifiers

PMID33839851
OpenAlexW2964480743

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.