ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2022
Data Augmentation and Transfer Learning for Data Quality Assessment in Respiratory Monitoring.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmaceutical and biomedical challenges for crew autonomy in health preservation during future exploration missions.Communications medicine · 2025Review
- Computer vision to predict cell seeding coverage in re-endothelialized mouse lungs.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Use of Artificial Intelligence for Analyzing Kidney Stone Composition: Are We There Yet?Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2023Article
- Impedance-Based Ventilation Detection and Signal Quality Control During Out-of-Hospital Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation.IEEE journal of biomedical and health informatics · 2023Article
- N-Net: Lesion region segmentations using the generalized hybrid dilated convolutions for polyps in colonoscopy images.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 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
13 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Changes in respiratory rate have been found to be one of the early signs of health deterioration in patients. In remote environments where diagnostic tools and medical attention are scarce, such as deep space exploration, the monitoring of the respiratory signal becomes crucial to timely detect life-threatening conditions. Nowadays, this signal can be measured using wearable technology; however, the use of such technology is often hampered by the low quality of the recordings, which leads more often to wrong diagnosis and conclusions. Therefore, to apply these data in diagnosis analysis, it is important to determine which parts of the signal are of sufficient quality. In this context, this study aims to evaluate the performance of a signal quality assessment framework, where two machine learning algorithms (support vector machine-SVM, and convolutional neural network-CNN) were used. The models were pre-trained using data of patients suffering from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The generalization capability of the models was evaluated by testing them on data from a different patient population, presenting normal and pathological breathing. The new patients underwent bariatric surgery and performed a controlled breathing protocol, displaying six different breathing patterns. Data augmentation (DA) and transfer learning (TL) were used to increase the size of the training set and to optimize the models for the new dataset. The effect of the different breathing patterns on the performance of the classifiers was also studied. The SVM did not improve when using DA, however, when using TL, the performance improved significantly (
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.