ArticlePloS one2026
Global-key region collaborative noise-aware for electrocardiogram signal quality assessment.
Article in PloS one, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Wearable electrocardiogram (ECG) devices enable long-term cardiac monitoring due to their convenience and comfort. However, various types of noise, such as baseline drift, power-line interference, and motion artifacts, can severely degrade signal quality and compromise the reliability of automated diagnosis. Consequently, ECG signal quality assessment (SQA) plays a crucial role in ensuring accurate downstream analysis. Existing supervised SQA methods rely heavily on large-scale annotated datasets, which are costly and time-consuming to obtain in real-world applications. Although unsupervised anomaly detection methods alleviate the dependence on labeled data, most existing approaches primarily focus on global signal characteristics and directly utilize reconstruction errors or feature-space distances for anomaly detection, while overlooking discriminative noise-related regions. As a result, their ability to distinguish noise contamination from physiological signal variations remains limited, leading to suboptimal generalization performance. To address this limitation, we propose a global-key region collaborative noise-aware ECG signal quality assessment method (NA-SQA) for unsupervised settings. NA-SQA integrates both global information and key noise-region features to enable more accurate quality evaluation. Specifically, we generate low-quality signals and corresponding quality labels by injecting various types of artificial noise into high-quality ECG signals. All signals are then passed through an autoencoder to reconstruct high-quality ECG signals. Subsequently, the original signals are used for global quality prediction, while the difference between the original and reconstructed signals is treated as the key noise region for key-region quality prediction. By jointly optimizing the global and key quality prediction tasks, the proposed model effectively integrates global information with more discriminative noise-region features, thereby enhancing its generalization capability to unseen low-quality ECG signals. Extensive experiments on four public ECG quality assessment datasets, namely BUTQDB, Icentia11K, EHOQA, and EAWQA, demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach. NA-SQA achieves F1 scores of 91.42%, 79.62%, 81.59%, and 81.56% on the four datasets, respectively, consistently outperforming state-of-the-art unsupervised ECG quality assessment methods and demonstrating superior robustness and generalization capability for ECG signal quality assessment in real-world noisy environments.
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.