ReviewMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Recent Advances in Materials and Flexible Sensors for Arrhythmia Detection.
Review in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- POC Sensor Systems and Artificial Intelligence-Where We Are Now and Where We Are Going?Biosensors · 2025Review
- Printed Strain Sensors for Motion Recognition: A Review of Materials, Fabrication Methods, and Machine Learning Algorithms.IEEE open journal of engineering in medicine and biology · 2025Article
- Flexible Thermoelectric Wearable Architecture for Wireless Continuous Physiological Monitoring.ACS applied materials & interfaces · 2024Article
- An end-end arrhythmia diagnosis model based on deep learning neural network with multi-scale feature extraction.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2023Article
- Continuous Monitoring of Health and Mobility Indicators in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease: A Review of Recent Technologies.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Soft wireless sternal patch to detect systemic vasoconstriction using photoplethysmography.iScience · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Arrhythmias are one of the leading causes of death in the United States, and their early detection is essential for patient wellness. However, traditional arrhythmia diagnosis by expert evaluation from intermittent clinical examinations is time-consuming and often lacks quantitative data. Modern wearable sensors and machine learning algorithms have attempted to alleviate this problem by providing continuous monitoring and real-time arrhythmia detection. However, current devices are still largely limited by the fundamental mismatch between skin and sensor, giving way to motion artifacts. Additionally, the desirable qualities of flexibility, robustness, breathability, adhesiveness, stretchability, and durability cannot all be met at once. Flexible sensors have improved upon the current clinical arrhythmia detection methods by following the topography of skin and reducing the natural interface mismatch between cardiac monitoring sensors and human skin. Flexible bioelectric, optoelectronic, ultrasonic, and mechanoelectrical sensors have been demonstrated to provide essential information about heart-rate variability, which is crucial in detecting and classifying arrhythmias. In this review, we analyze the current trends in flexible wearable sensors for cardiac monitoring and the efficacy of these devices for arrhythmia detection.
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.