Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39163610›Full record

ArticleInteractive journal of medical research2024

Exploring Computational Techniques in Preprocessing Neonatal Physiological Signals for Detecting Adverse Outcomes: Scoping Review.

Jessica Rahman, Aida Brankovic, Mark Tracy, Sankalp Khanna

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jessica RahmanCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) Australian e-Health Research Centre, Australia, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9930-241X
Aida BrankovicCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) Australian e-Health Research Centre, Australia, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7978-575X
Mark TracyNeonatal Intensive Care Unit, Westmead, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5648-468X
Sankalp KhannaCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) Australian e-Health Research Centre, Australia, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6125-8871

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

adverse outcomesmorbidityneonatal intensive care unitphysiological signalspredictive and diagnostic modelspretermsignal analysissignal processing

Identifiers

PMID39163610
PMCPMC11372324

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.