ArticleSystems science & control engineering2021
Heart rate control using first- and second-order models during treadmill exercise.
Article in Systems science & control engineering, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Personalized heart rate management through data-driven dynamic exercise control.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Heart rate variability changes with respect to time and exercise intensity during heart-rate-controlled steady-state treadmill running.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Feedback control of heart rate during treadmill exercise based on a two-phase response model.PloS one · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Heart rate control using first- and second-order models was compared using a novel control design strategy which shapes the input sensitivity function. Ten participants performed two feedback control test series on a treadmill with square wave and constant references. Using a repeated measures, counterbalanced study design, each series compared controllers C1 and C2 based on first- and second-order models, respectively. In the first series, tracking accuracy root-mean-square tracking error (RMSE) was not significantly lower for C2: 2.59 bpm vs. 2.69 bpm (mean, C1 vs. C2),
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.