ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Estimation of Respiratory Effort Through Diaphragmatic Electromyography Features.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Respiratory effort is a critical parameter for assessing respiratory function in various pathological conditions such as obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), as well as in patients undergoing respiratory ventilation. Currently, the gold-standard method for measuring it is esophageal pressure (Pes), which is obtrusive and uncomfortable for patients. An alternative approach is using diaphragmatic electromyography (dEMG), a non-obtrusive method that directly reflects the electrical drive triggering respiratory effort, holding potential for quantifying effort. Despite progress in this area, there is still no clear agreement on the best features for assessing respiratory effort from dEMG. This feasibility study considers several time, frequency, and statistical domain features, providing a comparative analysis to determine their performance in estimating respiratory effort. In particular, we evaluate the correlation of the different features with Pes using overnight recordings from 10 OSA patients and assess their robustness across different signal quality levels with the Kruskal-Wallis test. Our results support that time-domain dEMG features such as the filtered envelope, root mean square, and waveform length (WL) exhibit moderately strong correlations (R > 0.6) with respiratory effort. In terms of robustness to noise, the best features were WL, the area under the curve, and the slope sign change, demonstrating moderately strong to fair correlations (R > 0.5) even in low- to very low-quality signals. In contrast, features like skewness, the mean frequency, and the median frequency performed poorly (R < 0.3), regardless of signal quality, likely because they focus on overall signal characteristics rather than the dynamic and transient changes associated with respiratory effort by temporal features. These findings highlight the importance of selecting optimal features to obtain a reliable estimation of respiratory effort, providing a foundation for future research on non-intrusive methods.
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.