ArticleEthiopian journal of health sciences2022
Evaluation of a New Smartphone Powered Low-cost Pulse Oximeter Device.
Article in Ethiopian journal of health sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advances and Challenges Associated with Low-Cost Pulse Oximeters in Home Care Programs: A Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Measurement of blood oxygen saturation is a vital part of monitoring coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) patients. Pulse oximetry is commonly used to measure blood oxygen saturation and pulse rate for appropriate clinical intervention. But the majority of direct-to-consumer grade pulse oximeters did not pass through in-vivo testing, which results in their accuracy being questionable. Besides this, the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic exposed the limitations of the device in resource limited areas since independent monitoring is needed for COVID-19 patients. The purpose of this study was to perform an in-vivo evaluation of a newly developed smartphone powered low-cost pulse oximeter. Methods: The new prototype of a smartphone powered pulse oximeter was evaluated against the standard pulse oximeter by taking measurements from fifteen healthy volunteers. The accuracy of measurement was evaluated by calculating the percentage error and standard deviation. A repeatability and reproducibility test were carried out using the ANOVA method. Results: The average accuracy for measuring spot oxygen saturation (SPO2) and pulse rate (PR) was 99.18% with a standard deviation of 0.57 and 98.78% with a standard deviation of 0.61, respectively, when compared with the standard pulse oximeter device. The repeatability and reproducibility of SPO2 measurements were 0.28 and 0.86, respectively, which is in the acceptable range. Conclusion: The new prototype of smartphone powered pulse oximeter demonstrated better performance compared to the existing low-cost fingertip pulse oximeters. The device could be used for independent monitoring of COVID-19 patients at health institutions and also for home care.
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.