Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34577342›Full record

ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2021

A Comprehensive Review of Techniques for Processing and Analyzing Fetal Heart Rate Signals.

Alfonso Maria Ponsiglione, Carlo Cosentino, Giuseppe Cesarelli, Francesco Amato, Maria Romano

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
–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

33 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Cross-Database Evaluation of Deep Learning Methods for Intrapartum Cardiotocography Classification.IEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine · 2025
    Article
  10. Machine Learning for Biomedical Applications.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Fetal Heart Rate Preprocessing Techniques: A Scoping Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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.

Alfonso Maria PonsiglioneDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Information Technology (DIETI), University of Naples Federico II, Via Claudio 21, 80125 Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1346-515X
Carlo CosentinoDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine 'Gaetano Salvatore', University Magna Graecia of Catanzaro, Viale Tommaso Campanella 185, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy.
Giuseppe CesarelliDepartment of Chemical, Materials and Production Engineering (DICMaPI), University of Naples Federico II, Piazzale Tecchio 80, 80125 Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-8303-5900
Francesco AmatoDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Information Technology (DIETI), University of Naples Federico II, Via Claudio 21, 80125 Naples, Italy.
Maria RomanoDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Information Technology (DIETI), University of Naples Federico II, Via Claudio 21, 80125 Naples, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The availability of standardized guidelines regarding the use of electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) in clinical practice has not effectively helped to solve the main drawbacks of fetal heart rate (FHR) surveillance methodology, which still presents inter- and intra-observer variability as well as uncertainty in the classification of unreassuring or risky FHR recordings. Given the clinical relevance of the interpretation of FHR traces as well as the role of FHR as a marker of fetal wellbeing autonomous nervous system development, many different approaches for computerized processing and analysis of FHR patterns have been proposed in the literature. The objective of this review is to describe the techniques, methodologies, and algorithms proposed in this field so far, reporting their main achievements and discussing the value they brought to the scientific and clinical community. The review explores the following two main approaches to the processing and analysis of FHR signals: traditional (or linear) methodologies, namely, time and frequency domain analysis, and less conventional (or nonlinear) techniques. In this scenario, the emerging role and the opportunities offered by Artificial Intelligence tools, representing the future direction of EFM, are also discussed with a specific focus on the use of Artificial Neural Networks, whose application to the analysis of accelerations in FHR signals is also examined in a case study conducted by the authors.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceHeart Rate, FetalAlgorithmsCardiotocographyFemaleHeart RateHumansNeural Networks, ComputerPregnancyartificial neural networksbiomedical signal processing and analysisfetal heart ratefetal heart rate variabilitylinear FHRV indicesnonlinear FHRV indices

Identifiers

PMID34577342
PMCPMC8469481

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.