ArticleInteractive journal of medical research2024
Exploring Computational Techniques in Preprocessing Neonatal Physiological Signals for Detecting Adverse Outcomes: Scoping Review.
Article in Interactive journal of medical research, 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.
- Maturational physiology in preterm infants: morbidity impact and 2-year neurodevelopmental outcome.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- Multimodal data for predictive medicine: algorithmic fusion of clinical data in anesthesiology and intensive care.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Transforming neonatal care through informatics: A review of artificial intelligence, data, and implementation considerations.Seminars in perinatology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundComputational signal preprocessing is a prerequisite for developing data-driven predictive models for clinical decision support. Thus, identifying the best practices that adhere to clinical principles is critical to ensure transparency and reproducibility to drive clinical adoption. It further fosters reproducible, ethical, and reliable conduct of studies. This procedure is also crucial for setting up a software quality management system to ensure regulatory compliance in developing software as a medical device aimed at early preclinical detection of clinical deterioration.
objectiveThis scoping review focuses on the neonatal intensive care unit setting and summarizes the state-of-the-art computational methods used for preprocessing neonatal clinical physiological signals; these signals are used for the development of machine learning models to predict the risk of adverse outcomes.
methodsFive databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, IEEE, and ACM Digital Library) were searched using a combination of keywords and MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) terms. A total of 3585 papers from 2013 to January 2023 were identified based on the defined search terms and inclusion criteria. After removing duplicates, 2994 (83.51%) papers were screened by title and abstract, and 81 (0.03%) were selected for full-text review. Of these, 52 (64%) were eligible for inclusion in the detailed analysis.
resultsOf the 52 articles reviewed, 24 (46%) studies focused on diagnostic models, while the remainder (n=28, 54%) focused on prognostic models. The analysis conducted in these studies involved various physiological signals, with electrocardiograms being the most prevalent. Different programming languages were used, with MATLAB and Python being notable. The monitoring and capturing of physiological data used diverse systems, impacting data quality and introducing study heterogeneity. Outcomes of interest included sepsis, apnea, bradycardia, mortality, necrotizing enterocolitis, and hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy, with some studies analyzing combinations of adverse outcomes. We found a partial or complete lack of transparency in reporting the setting and the methods used for signal preprocessing. This includes reporting methods to handle missing data, segment size for considered analysis, and details regarding the modification of the state-of-the-art methods for physiological signal processing to align with the clinical principles for neonates. Only 7 (13%) of the 52 reviewed studies reported all the recommended preprocessing steps, which could have impacts on the downstream analysis.
conclusionsThe review found heterogeneity in the techniques used and inconsistent reporting of parameters and procedures used for preprocessing neonatal physiological signals, which is necessary to confirm adherence to clinical and software quality management system practices, usefulness, and choice of best practices. Enhancing transparency in reporting and standardizing procedures will boost study interpretation and reproducibility and expedite clinical adoption, instilling confidence in the research findings and streamlining the translation of research outcomes into clinical practice, ultimately contributing to the advancement of neonatal care and patient outcomes.
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.