Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41649789›Full record

Observational studyJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2026

Clinical validation of a novel accelerometer-based respiratory rate monitor.

O M Steihaug, T E Sjøset, A S Stordal, A D Sleire, O Ødegaard-Olsen, A Tunset, I Jammer

Registry-linked trialAbstract readObservational StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06911541 (Clinical Validation of a Novel, Accelerometer Based, Continuous Respiratory Rate Sensor), which is not on this 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.

NCT06911541 nacompletednot on this map

Clinical Validation of a Novel, Accelerometer Based, Continuous Respiratory Rate Sensor

TypeinterventionalSponsorEupnea ASRan2025 to 2025Enrolled29ConditionsRespiratory Rate Accuracy Test, Capnography, Wireless Vital Signs Monitoring System, Respiratory RateArmsWireless respiratory rate monitor
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

7 authors.

O M SteihaugDepartment of Internal Medicine, Haraldsplass Deaconal Hospital, Bergen, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-1849-3910
T E SjøsetDepartment of Pulmonology, University Hospital of Northern Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
A S StordalNORCE Research, Bergen, Norway.
A D SleireNORCE Research, Bergen, Norway.
O Ødegaard-OlsenEupnea AS, Bergen, Norway.ORCID 0009-0008-0197-2019
A TunsetEupnea AS, Bergen, Norway.ORCID 0009-0004-3009-7971
I JammerEupnea AS, Bergen, Norway. ib.jammer@helse-bergen.no.ORCID 0000-0001-6759-3929

Funding

Norwegian Innovation Grant number 2023/378171
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Respiratory rate (RR) is a vital sign often unused in clinical practice due to labour-intensive manual counting or capnography limitations in spontaneously breathing patients. This study validated RespX, a novel accelerometer-based wireless sensor, for continuous respiratory rate measurement in hospitalised patients. This prospective, single-centre observational study included hospitalised adults (> 18 years) expected to remain undisturbed for one hour while measuring RR. The RespX sensor, placed on the left chest wall, was compared with continuous capnography and manual counting every 20 min for one hour. The primary endpoint was respiratory rate measured by RespX within ± 3 breaths per minute compared to capnography. Linear mixed-effects models analyzed mean differences between methods. Twenty-nine patients completed the study. The proportion of RespX measurements within ± 3 breaths per minute of capnography was 77% (95% CI: 74.8-79.0%) for raw data and 82.8% (95% CI: 80.7-84.7%) after removing outliers. The proportion of RespX measurements within ± 3 breaths per minute of manual counting was 87,5% (95% CI: 81,1%-93,8%). For the capnography the proportions for the raw data was 87,8% (95% CI: 81,8-93,8%) and 94,5% (95% CI: 90,3%-98,7%) after removing outliers. Linear mixed-effects analysis showed mean differences of -0.40 (p = 0.43) for raw data and 0.39 (p = 0.15) for filtered data between RespX and capnography, supporting their equivalence. RespX demonstrated lower measurement variability (SD: 0.75-3.05) compared to capnography (SD: 0.99-5.19). No adverse events were observed during the study. The wireless RespX accelerometer-based sensor provides a novel and accurate method for assessing the respiratory rate in awake hospitalised patients compared with capnography.Trial registration: NCT06911541.

Indexed as

AccelerometryRespiratory RateAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCapnographyEquipment DesignFemaleHumansLinear ModelsMaleMiddle AgedMonitoring, PhysiologicProspective StudiesReproducibility of ResultsWireless TechnologyCapnographyClinical validationRespiratory rate monitoringVital signsWearable

Identifiers

PMID41649789
PMCPMC13194193

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.