ReviewJournal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England)2026
Heart rate variability as a strain parameter in maritime settings: a scoping review of methodological approaches to data collection and analysis in field studies on the high seas.
Review in Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England), 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeafarers are exposed to unique occupational stressors that place sustained demands on the autonomic nervous system. Heart rate variability (HRV) represents a promising non-invasive tool for assessing mental and physical strain in maritime settings. However, its methodological application in real field conditions remains poorly characterized, and existing HRV guidelines do not specifically address the methodological challenges of maritime field studies.
methodsA scoping review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Eleven maritime field studies measuring HRV in operational or semi-operational settings were included and assessed for device selection, measurement quality, analysis methods, HRV metrics, and covariates.
resultsChest strap systems were the most frequently used (n = 8) and showed sufficient validity for field use. Methodological heterogeneity in reporting of recording duration, analysis software, artifact handling and HRV parameters was high across studies. Operational factors including sailing schedule and work-rest organization were the most commonly examined covariates and were most frequently associated with significant HRV findings. Recurring findings were small and predominantly male populations, shared participant cohorts across multiple studies, and incomplete methodological reporting.
conclusionOverall, the studies utilized HRV appropriately for their respective aims. HRV measurement in maritime field settings is feasible but methodologically demanding, and it remains an underexplored domain, which limits the conclusions that can be drawn. More detailed and standardized reporting is necessary. Based on the recurring methodological reporting gaps, this review proposes a maritime-specific reporting checklist and an overview of recommended methodological options for future studies. Larger study populations are needed to account for confounding factors on board ships.
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.