2021
DOI: 10.1007/s12559-021-09910-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Comparison of Deep Learning Techniques for Arterial Blood Pressure Prediction

Abstract: Continuous vital signal monitoring is becoming more relevant in preventing diseases that afflict a large part of the world’s population; for this reason, healthcare equipment should be easy to wear and simple to use. Non-intrusive and non-invasive detection methods are a basic requirement for wearable medical devices, especially when these are used in sports applications or by the elderly for self-monitoring. Arterial blood pressure (ABP) is an essential physiological parameter for health monitoring. Most bloo… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
23
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 46 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Only 2.6% (6/230) of studies that applied DL methods to ECG data to perform BP estimation were identified in the literature search. A combined architecture of ResNets and LSTM was proposed twice (33.3%), once by Miao et al [ 94 ], who achieved a mean error of −0.22 (SD 5.82) mm Hg for systolic BP (SBP) prediction and of −0.75 (SD 5.62) mm Hg for diastolic BP (DBP) prediction using data that originated from a private database, and once by Paviglianiti et al [ 96 ], who achieved a mean average error of 4.118 mm Hg for SBP and 2.228 mm Hg for DBP prediction using the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care database. By contrast, Jeong and Lim [ 98 ] exercised a CNN-LSTM network on the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care database and managed to predict SBP and DBP with a mean error of 0.0 (SD 1.6) mm Hg and 0.2 (SD 1.3) mm Hg, respectively.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Only 2.6% (6/230) of studies that applied DL methods to ECG data to perform BP estimation were identified in the literature search. A combined architecture of ResNets and LSTM was proposed twice (33.3%), once by Miao et al [ 94 ], who achieved a mean error of −0.22 (SD 5.82) mm Hg for systolic BP (SBP) prediction and of −0.75 (SD 5.62) mm Hg for diastolic BP (DBP) prediction using data that originated from a private database, and once by Paviglianiti et al [ 96 ], who achieved a mean average error of 4.118 mm Hg for SBP and 2.228 mm Hg for DBP prediction using the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care database. By contrast, Jeong and Lim [ 98 ] exercised a CNN-LSTM network on the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care database and managed to predict SBP and DBP with a mean error of 0.0 (SD 1.6) mm Hg and 0.2 (SD 1.3) mm Hg, respectively.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A common pitfall in the use of calibrated techniques is that subsequent test data points do not differ significantly from the calibration value and thus yield small errors in prediction, whereas the data are presented as an aggregate pooled correlation plot or Bland-Altman plot with a correlation value that simply reflects the range of BPs across the population rather than patient-specific BP variation [326,327]. In our review of articles using DL for BP prediction, we did not encounter significant attempts to address the issue of BP variability in training data; in fact, many publications explicitly removed data points with hypertensive values or large pulse pressures from their data sets as "artifacts" [93][94][95][96]98].…”
Section: Principal Findingsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…After transfer learning-based calibration, the prediction performance was significantly improved. Based on PPG and ECG signals of 40 subjects selected from the MIMIC dataset, Paviglianiti et al [ 81 ] compared the performance of three deep learning models, ResNet, LSTM, and WaveNet. The results pointed out that ResNet combined with three LSTM layers achieved the best prediction performance, with an MAE of 4.118 and 2.228 mmHg for SBP and DBP, respectively.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Signalbased techniques, in turn, have been explored deep learning models in order to, jointly, extract features and perform estimation. Several methods, including combinations of them, have also been used: fully connected neural network [49], [50], convolutional neural network [32], [37], [48], [50], long short-term memory [32], [37], [42], [48]- [50], gated recurrent unit [50], AlexNet [42], [44], ResNet [42], [46], [49], WaveNet [49], U-Net [35], residual U-Net [39] and generative adversarial network [48].…”
Section: Background and State Of The Artmentioning
confidence: 99%