ArticlePulse (Basel, Switzerland)
Assessing the Validity of Computerized Algorithms for Determining Pulse Wave Velocity: A Clinical Study.
Article in Pulse (Basel, Switzerland). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Aortic stiffness, assessed through carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (PWV), has been associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events and mortality. Measurements of PWV are based on the proper identification of the foot of the pulse waveform by either the maximum of the second-derivative method (as used in Complior) or the intersecting tangents algorithms (as used in SphygmoCor). These approaches can give different results, especially at higher PWV ranges. However, these devices also differ by signal acquisition technology, signal filtering, and quality control algorithms, making the true contribution of analytical algorithms uncertain. The aim of the present study was to identify the differences in pulse transit time (PTT) and PWV calculated by these two algorithms when provided with the same input signal. Methods: In 113 subjects, 346 recordings of 10 s were obtained using the Complior Analyse system (PWV Results: The mean beat-by-beat PTT Conclusion: The present study shows that the difference between the two algorithms is negligible across a wide range of PTT and hence does not support the need for adjusting PWV according to the algorithm used for determining PTT.
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.