Observational studyChronic respiratory disease
Clinical validation of a wearable respiratory rate device: A brief report.
Observational study in Chronic respiratory disease. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03603860 (Comparison of Continuous Blood Pressure Measurement Using the Non-invasive, Wireless Biobeat Monitor With an Invasive Arterial Line), which is not on this 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.
Comparison of Continuous Blood Pressure Measurement Using the Non-invasive, Wireless Biobeat Monitor With an Invasive Arterial Line
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Respiratory Monitoring in Motion: An Overview of Wearable Methods and Algorithmic Approaches for Reliable Assessment.Biosensors · 2026Review
- Continuous remote monitoring of postoperative vital signs with the Biobeat patch: A multicenter prospective observational study.PloS one · 2026Observational
- Wearable devices as part of postoperative early warning score systems: a scoping review.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2025Article
- Review
- Measuring Respiration Rate from Speech.Digital biomarkersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRespiratory rate (RR) is used for the diagnosis and management of medical conditions and can predict clinical changes. Heavy workload, understaffing, and errors related to poor recording make it underutilized. Wearable devices may facilitate its use.
methodsRR measurements using a wearable photoplethysmography-based monitor were compared with medical grade devices in complementary clinical scenarios: Study one included a comparison to a capnograph in 35 healthy volunteers; Study two included a comparison to a ventilator monitor in 18 ventilated patients; and Study three included a comparison to capnograph in 92 COVID-19 patients with active pulmonary disease. Pearson's correlations and Bland-Altman analysis were used to assess the accuracy and agreement between the measurement techniques, including stratification for Body Mass Index (BMI) and skin tone. Statistical significance was set at
resultsHigh correlation was found in all studies (r = 0.991, 0.884, and 0.888, respectively,
conclusionsRR measurements using the wearable monitor were highly-correlated with medical-grade devices in various clinical settings.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03603860.
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.