ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2025
Reliability of hemodynamic parameters measured by bioimpedance cardiography at different intensities during incremental exercise testing.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Applications of bioimpedance measurement in clinical and allied fields: a comprehensive review.Biomedical engineering online · 2026Review
- Determinants of exercise capacity in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: central hemodynamics, ventilatory efficiency, and peripheral muscle oxygen utilization and function.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Bioimpedance cardiography offers a non-invasive and time-efficient method to measure hemodynamic parameters. Previous studies only investigated its reliability under steady-state conditions and at maximum load but not at ventilatory thresholds (VTs). This is the first study that assesses the reliability of measured hemodynamic parameters at different exercise stages during cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) using prespecified strict criteria to assess reliability. Methods: Data from 31 healthy, well-trained adults were analyzed. Each participant completed two CPETs, both following the same ramp protocol, with a 7-day interval between them. Hemodynamic parameters were measured with the PhysioFlow® (Manatec Biomedical, Poissy, France) at characteristic phases and thresholds [VT1, VT2, and peak oxygen uptake (V̇O Results: Heart rate, stroke volume, and cardiac output demonstrated good reliability on a group level (mean intraclass correlation >0.75) at both thresholds (0.91, 0.80, and 0.77 at P Conclusion: The PhysioFlow® reliably measures heart rate, stroke volume, and cardiac output during CPET on a group level. However, as shown by the Bland-Altman plots, the reliability is too low to be used for individual comparisons.
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.