ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023
A New Approach to Detecting Atrial Fibrillation Using Count Statistics of Relative Changes between Consecutive RR Intervals.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. 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.
- Heart rate variability in patients with atrial fibrillation of sinus rhythm or atrial fibrillation: chaos or merit?Annals of medicine · 2025Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe ratio of the difference between neighboring RR intervals to the length of the preceding RR interval (x%) represents the relative change in the duration between two cardiac cycles. We investigated the diagnostic properties of the percentage of relative RR interval differences equal to or greater than x% (pRRx%) with x% in a range between 0.25% and 25% for the distinction of atrial fibrillation (AF) from sinus rhythm (SR).
methodsWe used 1-min ECG segments with RR intervals with either AF (32,141 segments) or SR (32,769 segments) from the publicly available Physionet Long-Term Atrial Fibrillation Database (LTAFDB). The properties of pRRx% for different x% were analyzed using the statistical procedures and metrics commonly used to characterize diagnostic methods.
resultsThe distributions of pRRx% for AF and SR differ significantly over the whole studied range of x% from 0.25% to 25%, with particularly outstanding diagnostic properties for the x% range of 1.5% to 6%. However, pRR3.25% outperformed other pRRx%. Firstly, it had one of the highest and closest to perfect areas under the curve (0.971). For pRR3.25%, the optimal threshold for distinction AF from SR was set at 75.32%. Then, the accuracy was 95.44%, sensitivity was 97.16%, specificity was 93.76%, the positive predictive value was 93.85%, the negative predictive value was 97.11%, and the diagnostic odds ratio was 514. The excellent diagnostic properties of pRR3.25% were confirmed in the publicly available MIT-BIH Atrial Fibrillation Database. In a direct comparison, pRR3.25% outperformed the diagnostic properties of pRR31 (the percentage of successive RR intervals differing by at least 31 ms), i.e., so far, the best single parameter differentiating AF from SR.
conclusionsA family of pRRx% parameters has excellent diagnostic properties for AF detection in a range of x% between 1.5% and 6%. However, pRR3.25% outperforms other pRRx% parameters and pRR31 (until now, probably the most robust single heart rate variability parameter for AF diagnosis). The exquisite pRRx% diagnostic properties for AF and its simple computation make it well-suited for AF detection in modern ECG technologies (mobile/wearable devices, biopatches) in long-term monitoring. The diagnostic properties of pRRx% deserve further exploration in other databases with AF.
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.