Literature DB >> 26234196

A careful look at ECG sampling frequency and R-peak interpolation on short-term measures of heart rate variability.

Robert J Ellis1, Bilei Zhu, Julian Koenig, Julian F Thayer, Ye Wang.   

Abstract

As the literature on heart rate variability (HRV) continues to burgeon, so too do the challenges faced with comparing results across studies conducted under different recording conditions and analysis options. Two important methodological considerations are (1) what sampling frequency (SF) to use when digitizing the electrocardiogram (ECG), and (2) whether to interpolate an ECG to enhance the accuracy of R-peak detection. Although specific recommendations have been offered on both points, the evidence used to support them can be seen to possess a number of methodological limitations. The present study takes a new and careful look at how SF influences 24 widely used time- and frequency-domain measures of HRV through the use of a Monte Carlo-based analysis of false positive rates (FPRs) associated with two-sample tests on independent sets of healthy subjects. HRV values from the first sample were calculated at 1000 Hz, and HRV values from the second sample were calculated at progressively lower SFs (and either with or without R-peak interpolation). When R-peak interpolation was applied prior to HRV calculation, FPRs for all HRV measures remained very close to 0.05 (i.e. the theoretically expected value), even when the second sample had an SF well below 100 Hz. Without R-peak interpolation, all HRV measures held their expected FPR down to 125 Hz (and far lower, in the case of some measures). These results provide concrete insights into the statistical validity of comparing datasets obtained at (potentially) very different SFs; comparisons which are particularly relevant for the domains of meta-analysis and mobile health.

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26234196     DOI: 10.1088/0967-3334/36/9/1827

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Physiol Meas        ISSN: 0967-3334            Impact factor:   2.833


  16 in total

1.  Uncertainty in heart rate complexity metrics caused by R-peak perturbations.

Authors:  Nicholas J Napoli; Matthew W Demas; Sanjana Mendu; Chad L Stephens; Kellie D Kennedy; Angela R Harrivel; Randall E Bailey; Laura E Barnes
Journal:  Comput Biol Med       Date:  2018-10-17       Impact factor: 4.589

2.  Ultra-shortened time-domain HRV parameters at rest and following exercise in athletes: an alternative to frequency computation of sympathovagal balance.

Authors:  Michael R Esco; Henry N Williford; Andrew A Flatt; Todd J Freeborn; Fabio Y Nakamura
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2017-11-11       Impact factor: 3.078

3.  Reliability of the Parabola Approximation Method in Heart Rate Variability Analysis Using Low-Sampling-Rate Photoplethysmography.

Authors:  Hyun Jae Baek; JaeWook Shin; Gunwoo Jin; Jaegeol Cho
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2017-10-24       Impact factor: 4.460

4.  Machine Learning and Mobile Health Monitoring Platforms: A Case Study on Research and Implementation Challenges.

Authors:  Omar Boursalie; Reza Samavi; Thomas E Doyle
Journal:  J Healthc Inform Res       Date:  2018-05-22

5.  Lowering the Sampling Rate: Heart Rate Response during Cognitive Fatigue.

Authors:  Kar Fye Alvin Lee; Elliot Chan; Josip Car; Woon-Seng Gan; Georgios Christopoulos
Journal:  Biosensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-10

6.  How Live Performance Moves the Human Heart.

Authors:  Haruka Shoda; Mayumi Adachi; Tomohiro Umeda
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-04-22       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 7.  Heart Rate Variability and Cardiac Vagal Tone in Psychophysiological Research - Recommendations for Experiment Planning, Data Analysis, and Data Reporting.

Authors:  Sylvain Laborde; Emma Mosley; Julian F Thayer
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2017-02-20

Review 8.  Hidden Signals-The History and Methods of Heart Rate Variability.

Authors:  Gernot Ernst
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2017-10-16

9.  Brain structure and parasympathetic function during rest and stress in young adult women.

Authors:  Andrew J Fridman; Xi Yang; Veronika Vilgis; Kate E Keenan; Alison E Hipwell; Amanda E Guyer; Erika E Forbes; Melynda D Casement
Journal:  Brain Struct Funct       Date:  2021-02-22       Impact factor: 3.270

10.  Ultra-conformal drawn-on-skin electronics for multifunctional motion artifact-free sensing and point-of-care treatment.

Authors:  Faheem Ershad; Anish Thukral; Jiping Yue; Phillip Comeaux; Yuntao Lu; Hyunseok Shim; Kyoseung Sim; Nam-In Kim; Zhoulyu Rao; Ross Guevara; Luis Contreras; Fengjiao Pan; Yongcao Zhang; Ying-Shi Guan; Pinyi Yang; Xu Wang; Peng Wang; Xiaoyang Wu; Cunjiang Yu
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2020-07-30       Impact factor: 14.919

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.