ReviewmHealth2024
Wearable heart rate variability and atrial fibrillation monitoring to improve clinically relevant endpoints in cardiac surgery-a systematic review.
Review in mHealth, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lifestyle modification in atrial fibrillation: Mechanisms, phenotypes and ablation outcomes.Experimental physiology · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in neurocardiology: decoding brain-heart network interactions for clinical and translational insights.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
- Validation of a Wearable Sensor Prototype for Measuring Heart Rate to Prescribe Physical Activity: Cross-Sectional Exploratory Study.JMIR biomedical engineering · 2024Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This systematic review aims to highlight the untapped potential of heart rate variability (HRV) and atrial fibrillation (AF) monitoring by wearable health monitoring devices as a critical diagnostic tool in cardiac surgery (CS) patients. We reviewed established predictive capabilities of HRV and AF monitoring in specific cardiosurgical scenarios and provide a perspective on additional predictive properties of wearable health monitoring devices that need to be investigated. Methods: After screening most relevant databases, we included 33 publications in this review. Perusing these publications on HRV's prognostic value, we could identify HRV as a predictor for sudden cardiac death, mortality after acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and post operative atrial fibrillation (POAF). With regards to standard AF assessment, which typically includes extensive periods of unrecorded cardiac activity, we demonstrated that continuous monitoring via wearables recorded significant cardiac events that would otherwise have been missed. Results: Photoplethysmography and single-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) were identified as the most useful and convenient technical assessment modalities, and their advantages and disadvantages were described in detail. As a call to further action, we observed that the scientific community has relatively extensively explored wearable AF screening, whereas HRV assessment to improve relevant clinical outcomes in CS is rarely studied; it still has great potential to be leveraged. Conclusions: Therefore, risk assessment in CS would benefit greatly from earlier preoperative and postoperative AF detection, comprehensive and accurate assessment of cardiac health through HRV metrics, and continuous long-term monitoring. These should be achievable via commercially available wearables.
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.