ArticleScientific reports2022
Noncontact assessment for fatigue based on heart rate variability using IR-UWB radar.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimized stress transfer interfaces enabled wearable nano-electronics for fatigue driving monitoring.Microsystems & nanoengineering · 2026Article
- Real-Time Radar-Based Hand Motion Recognition on FPGA Using a Hybrid Deep Learning Model.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Smart furniture using radar technology for cardiac health monitoring.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Feasibility of Early Assessment for Psychological Distress: HRV-Based Evaluation Using IR-UWB Radar.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- A SISO FMCW radar based on inherently frequency scanning antennas for 2-D indoor tracking of multiple subjects.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Accuracy of Self-Injection Locking Radar System for Vital Signs Detection During the COVID-19 Pandemic at a Hospital in Taiwan: Measuring Vital Signs Accurately with SIL Radar for Hospital Healthcare.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2023Article
- Palliative care and new technologies. The use of smart sensor technologies and its impact on the Total Care principle.BMC palliative care · 2023Review
- Analysis of Signal Processing Methods to Reject the DC Offset Contribution of Static Reflectors in FMCW Radar-Based Vital Signs Monitoring.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Physical fatigue can be assessed using heart rate variability (HRV). We measured HRV at rest and in a fatigued state using impulse-radio ultra wideband (IR-UWB) radar in a noncontact fashion and compared the measurements with those obtained using electrocardiography (ECG) to assess the reliability and validity of the radar measurements. HRV was measured in 15 subjects using radar and ECG simultaneously before (rest for 10 min before exercise) and after a 20-min exercise session (fatigue level 1 for 0-9 min; fatigue level 2 for 10-19 min; recovery for ≥ 20 min after exercise). HRV was analysed in the frequency domain, including the low-frequency component (LF), high-frequency component (HF) and LF/HF ratio. The LF/HF ratio measured using radar highly agreed with that measured using ECG during rest (ICC = 0.807), fatigue-1 (ICC = 0.712), fatigue-2 (ICC = 0.741) and recovery (ICC = 0.764) in analyses using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). The change pattern in the LH/HF ratios during the experiment was similar between radar and ECG. The subject's body fat percentage was linearly associated with the time to recovery from physical fatigue (R
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.