ArticleFrontiers in physiology2025
Fusing wrist pulse and ECG data for enhanced identification of coronary heart disease and its complications.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Construction of classification model and analysis of risk factors in patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to explore the potential of synchronously acquiring wrist pressure pulse wave (PPW) and limb lead electrocardiogram (ECG) signals for the development of an identification model for coronary heart disease (CHD) and its associated comorbidities. Methods: A custom-designed device equipped with pressure and ECG sensors, was utilized to synchronously collect wrist PPW and limb-lead ECG signals from 748 participants (463 for modeling and 285 for external validation). Features were extracted from these two types of physiological signals to form distinct datasets, and RF models were built based on different datasets. The top-performing RF model was then selected and compared against the Feature-Selected (FS-RF), Support Vector Machine (SVM) and Bagged Decision Tree (BDT) models. Ultimately, the optimal model for predicting coronary heart disease (CHD) and its comorbidity was determined based on evaluation metrics. Results: The RF model that integrated both PPW and ECG features demonstrated significantly higher effectiveness compared to the RF model that relied on a single physiological signal. Furthermore, when benchmarked against the feature-selected RF(FS-RF), SVM and DBT models, the FS-RF model demonstrated the best performance, achieving an accuracy of 76.32%, an average precision of 75.82%, an average recall of 76.11%, and an average F1-score of 75.88%, all of which were higher than those of other models. Notably, the selected feature by FS-RF encompassed both PPW and ECG features. Conclusion: This study highlights the importance of synchronously acquiring of PPW and ECG signal, along with feature selection, in enhancing the performance of the FS-RF model for identifying CHD and its associated conditions. These findings provide a scientific basis for the application of wearable devices in clinical settings, highlighting their potential to aid in the early detection and management of cardiovascular disease.
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.