Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34577227›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Assessment of Non-Invasive Blood Pressure Prediction from PPG and rPPG Signals Using Deep Learning.

Fabian Schrumpf, Patrick Frenzel, Christoph Aust, Georg Osterhoff, Mirco Fuchs

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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.

Fabian SchrumpfLaboratory for Biosignal Processing, Leipzig University of Applied Sciences, 04317 Leipzig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2956-4104
Patrick FrenzelLaboratory for Biosignal Processing, Leipzig University of Applied Sciences, 04317 Leipzig, Germany.
Christoph AustDepartment of Orthopaedics, Trauma and Plastic Surgery, University of Leipzig Medical Center, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Georg OsterhoffDepartment of Orthopaedics, Trauma and Plastic Surgery, University of Leipzig Medical Center, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Mirco FuchsLaboratory for Biosignal Processing, Leipzig University of Applied Sciences, 04317 Leipzig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7553-1517

Funding

Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Wissenschaft und Digitalisierung 49VF170043
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Exploiting photoplethysmography signals (PPG) for non-invasive blood pressure (BP) measurement is interesting for various reasons. First, PPG can easily be measured using fingerclip sensors. Second, camera based approaches allow to derive remote PPG (rPPG) signals similar to PPG and therefore provide the opportunity for non-invasive measurements of BP. Various methods relying on machine learning techniques have recently been published. Performances are often reported as the mean average error (MAE) on the data which is problematic. This work aims to analyze the PPG- and rPPG based BP prediction error with respect to the underlying data distribution. First, we train established neural network (NN) architectures and derive an appropriate parameterization of input segments drawn from continuous PPG signals. Second, we use this parameterization to train NNs with a larger PPG dataset and carry out a systematic evaluation of the predicted blood pressure. The analysis revealed a strong systematic increase of the prediction error towards less frequent BP values across NN architectures. Moreover, we tested different train/test set split configurations which underpin the importance of a careful subject-aware dataset assignment to prevent overly optimistic results. Third, we use transfer learning to train the NNs for rPPG based BP prediction. The resulting performances are similar to the PPG-only case. Finally, we apply different personalization techniques and retrain our NNs with subject-specific data for both the PPG-only and rPPG case. Whilst the particular technique is less important, personalization reduces the prediction errors significantly.

Indexed as

Deep LearningPhotoplethysmographyBlood PressureBlood Pressure DeterminationNeural Networks, Computerarterial blood pressureblood pressure estimationconvolutional neural networkcuffless blood pressuredeep learningimaging photoplethoysmogramlong short-term memoryphotoplethysmogramremote photoplethysmogram

Identifiers

PMID34577227
PMCPMC8472879

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.