Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41577913›Full record

ArticleAdvances in experimental medicine and biology2026

Influence of Arterial Occlusion at Various Cuff Positions on Systemic Circulation Measured by Remote Photoplethymography (rPPG).

Leah DeVos, Gennadi Saiko, Alexandre Douplik

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in experimental medicine and biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Leah DeVosDepartment of Engineering, Toronto Metropolitan University, Toronto, ON, Canada. leah.devos@torontomu.ca.
Gennadi SaikoDepartment of Physics, Toronto Metropolitan University, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Alexandre DouplikDepartment of Physics, Toronto Metropolitan University, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundArterial occlusion is a ubiquitous medical procedure used in many clinical scenarios. However, no standard protocol exists for selecting the applied pressure or cuff position. As various pressures and positions may trigger different physiological responses, it is crucial to understand these peculiarities. The current work aims to investigate if there is any difference in the systemic response to the occlusion at various cuff positions (upper vs. lower arm).

methodsThe hands of healthy volunteers (10 volunteers) were occluded by inflating the blood pressure cuff to 200 mmHg, and the cuff was placed on the upper or lower arm. The remote photoplethysmography (rPPG) measurements of control and experimental hands were taken. To assess systemic response, we have analyzed the behavior of AC (low, respiratory, and heart rate frequency) components in green and red channels during occlusion and reperfusion.

resultsWe have not found a statistically significant difference in the low, respiratory, or heart rate spectra between occlusion at 200 mmHg in either cuff position.

conclusionsOur preliminary results show that the systemic response is similar at both cuff positions. However, findings for both experimental and control hands in most cases have small or medium effect sizes. As such, to avoid a Type II error, further experimentation with proper power calculations and an increased sample size is required.

Indexed as

ArteriesPhotoplethysmographyAdultBlood PressureFemaleHeart RateHumansMaleRegional Blood FlowBlood perfusionCardiovascular physiologyHemodynamicsNon-invasive monitoringVascular assessment

Identifiers

PMID41577913

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.