ArticlePloS one2026
Evaluating heart rate coupling with Multi-dimensional Recurrence Quantification Analysis (MdRQA) and Cross-Correlation (CC): Analytical decisions and implications.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Interpersonal heart rate coupling appears as a promising marker of group performance and coordination. However, discrepancy in methodological approaches challenges the interpretation of the results across studies. A more consistent and informed approach to preprocessing and analysis techniques could produce a more coherent picture on the value of heart rate coupling. In this manuscript, we examine the effects of different methodological decisions (resampling, analysis methods and their parameters) on the ability to capture coupling. For this purpose, we utilize both experimental dyadic heart rate data collected during a collaborative drumming task, and synthetic data with similar characteristics. Starting from preprocessing, we compare heart rate resampling window sizes, juxtapose Cross-Correlation (CC), windowed CC and Multidimensional Recurrence Quantification Analysis (MdRQA) and elaborate on the MdRQA parameter estimation and form of quantification. Our findings imply that CC as well as unembedded MdRQA recurrence rate (%REC) better distinguish coupled heart rate data from uncoupled ones, or, in other words, identify heart rate coupling. Moreover, for this objective, we suggest using Beats per Minute applying a small data-driven resampling window size, and, for MdRQA setting a moderate threshold yielding %REC between 15-25.
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.