ArticleScientific reports2026
Radar-based inspiratory-to-expiratory time ratio estimation: a validation study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Respiration is a key indicator of health and wellbeing, with metrics such as respiratory rate (RR), inspiratory time (TI), expiratory time (TE), and the inspiratory-to-expiratory time (I:E) ratio offering insights into conditions ranging from acute life-threatening and chronic diseases to symptom management. While traditional methods already measure these parameters with high accuracy, they still require contact-based sensors, limiting their practicality for continuous monitoring. This study evaluates radar as a non-contact alternative by validating multiple radar-derived respiratory metrics against impedance pneumography measurements in 30 healthy volunteers at rest. Synchronous recordings from both modalities were analysed to assess agreement across methods using descriptive statistics, scatter plots, modified Bland-Altman plots, and equivalence testing (TI: ±0.3 s, TE: ±0.3 s, RR: ±2 brpm, I:E ratio: ±0.2). Equivalence testing indicated high correlation (p ≤ 0.001***) across all metrics, with 81.8% (TI), 77.6% (TE), 97.2% (RR), and 85.7% (I:E ratio) of values within predefined bounds. These findings highlight radar's potential for continuous respiratory monitoring, particularly in medical fields where minimizing patient burden is essential as in palliative, post anaesthesia, and intensive care settings.
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.