ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
A Center-of-Pressure Guided Finger-Press Sensor for Cuffless Blood Pressure Estimation.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cuffless blood pressure estimation using the finger-pressing method remains sensitive to improper finger centering and inconsistent contact force, which degrade the accuracy of the oscillometric envelope and PPG signal morphology. This paper details the development of a research prototype that integrates three force sensors and a photoplethysmograph (PPG) sensor to quantify the finger-device interaction. This system is intended as a pre-clinical research tool rather than a clinically validated medical device. We implement a weighted centroid algorithm for center of pressure (CoP) feedback to guide geometric centering, alongside a Hybrid Ridge Regression model to estimate the total contact force. The system was evaluated on a pre-clinical pilot cohort of 48 healthy participants (1274 recordings), comparing inflationary (ramp-up) and deflationary (ramp-down) interaction modalities. Force calibration achieved a mean absolute error (MAE) of 1.2 g, with hardware analysis confirming a limited zero-load baseline drift of -0.29% over 50 days. The best single-recording calibrated model achieved a mean absolute error (MAE) of 5.55 mmHg (systolic) and 5.20 mmHg (diastolic), with a mean error (ME) ± standard deviation (SD) of +0.50±7.25 and +1.19±6.47 mmHg, respectively, in this pilot cohort, demonstrating the feasibility of the three-point force-sensing design with CoP tracking.
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.