ArticlePhysical and engineering sciences in medicine2025
Fr
Article in Physical and engineering sciences in medicine, 2025. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The self-executing investigation of electrocardiogram (ECG) signal plays a pivotal role in the early identification and supervision of cardiac arrhythmias. The diversified physiology of arrhythmia and the presence of precise dissimilarities in the chronic ECG characteristics create obstacles in conspiring authentic automated methods. The elimination of artefacts, peak dislocation, and unattended weaker neighbouring packets with strong spectral neighbours usually pose a challenge during the process of arrhythmia detection. To deal with these challenges, this paper exploits the Fractional Superlet spectral analysis (FSSA) that smooth out the variation in time–frequency resolution as a function of frequency by allowing fractional order of wavelets and hence makes the signal noise-free and ensures proper placement of peaks. The clear depiction of time–frequency pattern enhances the accuracy of heart rate estimation. It also presents a deep learning-based model employing a time–frequency energy representation of the signal to detect and classify multiple classes of arrhythmia. This provides enough information to make preferable use of CNN performance thus eliminating the need for artefact removal and feature extraction steps. The proposed method is validated over MIT-BIH Arrhythmia DB, MIT-BIH Malignant Ventricular Ectopy DB, MIT-BIH Atrial fibrillation DB, and MIT-BIH Supraventricular DB, to scrutinize the performance. An ensemble of the FASLT technique and VGG19 yields an overall accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, precision and F1-score of 98, 97.95, 99.32, 97.96 and 97.93% respectively for arrhythmia detection. The proposed method performs better in terms of specificity in comparison to existing methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41037239What 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.