Trial reportPeerJ2026
Personalized breathing recommendations for anxiety relief: a data-driven exploratory approach focusing on feasibility.
Trial report in PeerJ, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breathing exercises are widely used to alleviate anxiety, but most interventions use fixed templates of inhalation, exhalation, and repetition. This study preliminarily explores the feasibility of data-driven personalization of breathing recommendations for general individuals. We hypothesized that based on the characteristics of individual users, a data-driven method could give a feasible breathing intervention suggestion without the need of specialized hardware. A multilayer perceptron was trained on questionnaire responses to predict the inhalation, exhalation, and repetition times. The model stability was assessed using several independently trained models and exhibited high consistency with coefficients of variation below 10% across all outputs. A single-blind randomized study (
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.