ArticleIEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering2022
Assessment of Calibration Models for Cuff-Less Blood Pressure Measurement After One Year of Aging.
Article in IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing the Efficacy of Various Machine Learning Algorithms in Predicting Blood Pressure Using Pulse Transit Time.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- AI-driven system for non-contact continuous nocturnal blood pressure monitoring using fiber optic ballistocardiography.Communications engineering · 2024Article
- Development of a Personalized Multiclass Classification Model to Detect Blood Pressure Variations Associated with Physical or Cognitive Workload.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Challenges Presented by Cuffless Measurement of Blood Pressure if Adopted for Diagnosis and Treatment of Hypertension.Pulse (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Wearable Photoplethysmography for Cardiovascular Monitoring.Proceedings of the IEEE. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers · 2022Article
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 at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveMany calibration models for cuff-less blood pressure (BP) measurement must be periodically updated with cuff BP values to account for vascular aging. However, the time period required for these "cuff re-calibrations" is largely unknown. The impact of one year of aging on several calibration models was assessed.
methodsTen humans (6 males, 57±18 years, 3 hypertensives) were studied during multiple recording sessions that occurred one year apart. In each session, electrocardiography (ECG), ear photoplethysmography (PPG), finger PPG, and toe PPG waveforms and manual cuff BP were recorded before and after slow breathing, mental arithmetic, cold pressor, and nitroglycerin. Linear models based on each PPG waveform, which were previously shown to offer value in predicting the intervention-induced BP changes in a larger subject cohort, were employed. The model coefficients were determined for each subject via one session, and the fully-defined, subject-specific calibration models were then evaluated in the corresponding subjects via the session one year later.
resultsOnly a linear model relating toe pulse arrival time (PAT) - time delay between ECG R-wave and toe PPG foot - to systolic BP (SBP) remained useful. After the year, this model changed little on average (root-mean-squared-error (RMSE) = 1.5 mmHg) and predicted the cuff BP values better than the average of the initial cuff BP values of the subject (RMSE = 9.6±0.8 mmHg vs. 12.7±1.0 mmHg; p < 0.05).
conclusionThese results suggest annual cuff recalibrations for the toe PAT-SBP model. SIGNIFICANCE: Toe PAT may offer a practical recalibration period that fosters user adherence.
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.