ArticlePhysiological reports2021
Machine learning powered tools for automated analysis of muscle sympathetic nerve activity recordings.
Article in Physiological reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Machine learning powered tools for automated analysis of muscle sympathetic nerve activity recordings.Physiological reports · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Automated analysis and quantification of physiological signals in clinical practice and medical research can reduce manual labor, increase efficiency, and provide more objective, reproducible results. To build a novel platform for the analysis of muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA), we employed state-of-the-art data processing and machine learning applications. Data processing methods for integrated MSNA recordings were developed to evaluate signals regarding the overall quality of the signal, the validity of individual signal peaks regarding the potential to be MSNA bursts and the timing of their occurrence. An overall probability score was derived from this flexible platform to evaluate each individual signal peak automatically. Overall, three deep neural networks were designed and trained to validate individual signal peaks randomly sampled from recordings representing only electrical noise and valid microneurography recordings. A novel data processing method for the whole signal was developed to differentiate between periods of valid MSNA signal recordings and periods in which the signal was not available or lost due to involuntary movement of the recording electrode. A probabilistic model for timing of the signal bursts was implemented as part of the system. Machine Learning algorithms and data processing tools were implemented to replicate the complex decision-making process of manual MSNA analysis. Validation of manual MSNA analysis including intra- and inter-rater validity and a comparison with automated MSNA tools is required. The developed toolbox for automated MSNA analysis can be extended in a flexible way to include algorithms based on other datasets.
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.