ArticleScientific reports2023
Optimizing the input feature sets and machine learning algorithms for reliable and accurate estimation of continuous, cuffless blood pressure.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. 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.
- Advancements and challenges in blood pressure monitoring using pulse wave propagation: a comprehensive review and ISO 81060-2 based statistical analysis.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2026Review
- Review
- Non-invasive blood pressure monitoring with in-ear infrasonic hemodynography for preventative cardiovascular care.NPJ cardiovascular health · 2025Article
- Optimizing Input Feature Sets Using Catch-22 and Personalization for an Accurate and Reliable Estimation of Continuous, Cuffless Blood Pressure.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Comparative study of ten machine learning algorithms for short-term forecasting in gas warning systems.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Transforming the cardiometabolic disease landscape: Multimodal AI-powered approaches in prevention and management.Cell metabolism · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The advent of mobile devices, wearables and digital healthcare has unleashed a demand for accurate, reliable, and non-interventional ways to measure continuous blood pressure (BP). Many consumer products claim to measure BP with a cuffless device, but their lack of accuracy and reliability limit clinical adoption. Here, we demonstrate how multimodal feature datasets, comprising: (i) pulse arrival time (PAT); (ii) pulse wave morphology (PWM), and (iii) demographic data, can be combined with optimized Machine Learning (ML) algorithms to estimate Systolic BP (SBP), Diastolic BP (DBP) and Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP) within a 5 mmHg bias of the gold standard Intra-Arterial BP, well within the acceptable limits of the IEC/ANSI 80601-2-30 (2018) standard. Furthermore, DBP's calculated using 126 datasets collected from 31 hemodynamically compromised patients had a standard deviation within 8 mmHg, while SBP's and MAP's exceeded these limits. Using ANOVA and Levene's test for error means and standard deviations, we found significant differences in the various ML algorithms but found no significant differences amongst the multimodal feature datasets. Optimized ML algorithms and key multimodal features obtained from larger real-world data (RWD) sets could enable more reliable and accurate estimation of continuous BP in cuffless devices, accelerating wider clinical adoption.
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.