Observational studyJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2024
A machine learning algorithm for detecting abnormal patterns in continuous capnography and pulse oximetry monitoring.
Observational study in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 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.
- Improving definitions and innovations for identification and prevention of postoperative opioid-induced respiratory depression (OIRD): Proceedings of the International Consensus Conference.Journal of clinical anesthesia · 2026Article
- AI-driven virtual cell models in preclinical research: technical pathways, validation mechanisms, and clinical translation potential.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Review
- Healthcare 5.0-Driven Clinical Intelligence: The Learn-Predict-Monitor-Detect-Correct Framework for Systematic Artificial Intelligence Integration in Critical Care.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Continuous capnography monitors patient ventilation but can be susceptible to artifact, resulting in alarm fatigue. Development of smart algorithms may facilitate accurate detection of abnormal ventilation, allowing intervention before patient deterioration. The objective of this analysis was to use machine learning (ML) to classify combined waveforms of continuous capnography and pulse oximetry as normal or abnormal. We used data collected during the observational, prospective PRODIGY trial, in which patients receiving parenteral opioids underwent continuous capnography and pulse oximetry monitoring while on the general care floor [1]. Abnormal ventilation segments in the data stream were reviewed by nine experts and inter-rater agreement was assessed. Abnormal segments were defined as the time series 60s before and 30s after an abnormal pattern was detected. Normal segments (90s continuous monitoring) were randomly sampled and filtered to discard sequences with missing values. Five ML models were trained on extracted features and optimized towards an Fβ score with β = 2. The results show a high inter-rater agreement (> 87%), allowing 7,858 sequences (2,944 abnormal) to be used for model development. Data were divided into 80% training and 20% test sequences. The XGBoost model had the highest Fβ score of 0.94 (with β = 2), showcasing an impressive recall of 0.98 against a precision of 0.83. This study presents a promising advancement in respiratory monitoring, focusing on reducing false alarms and enhancing accuracy of alarm systems. Our algorithm reliably distinguishes normal from abnormal waveforms. More research is needed to define patterns to distinguish abnormal ventilation from artifacts.
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.