Computers in Cardiology 2000. Vol.27 (Cat. 00CH37163)
DOI: 10.1109/cic.2000.898537
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of methods for adaptive removal of motion artifact

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
42
0

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 68 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
2
42
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Approaches previously investigated to reduce motion artifacts include skin abrasion at the electrode site (Tam andWebster 1977, Burbank and, and adaptive filtering techniques that utilize as a reference signal either electrode motion measured using single or dual axis accelerometers (Raya and Sison 2002, Tong et al 2002) or a two-axis magnetoresistive sensor (Tong et al 2002), skin stretch related signals measured using a strain gauge (Hamilton and Curley 1997, Hamilton et al 2000a, 2000b, 1999, or electrode/skin impedance measurements (Hamilton et al 2000b, Devlin et al 1984 Tam and Webster's (1977) research indicated that the change in skin potential is the major source of motion artifact and proposed the method of skin abrasion to minimize this artifact. Odman and Oberg (1982) studied movement-induced potentials in various electrode configurations and concluded that potentials generated by skin deformation beneath the electrode dominate the disturbance pattern in ECG recording.…”
Section: Previous Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Approaches previously investigated to reduce motion artifacts include skin abrasion at the electrode site (Tam andWebster 1977, Burbank and, and adaptive filtering techniques that utilize as a reference signal either electrode motion measured using single or dual axis accelerometers (Raya and Sison 2002, Tong et al 2002) or a two-axis magnetoresistive sensor (Tong et al 2002), skin stretch related signals measured using a strain gauge (Hamilton and Curley 1997, Hamilton et al 2000a, 2000b, 1999, or electrode/skin impedance measurements (Hamilton et al 2000b, Devlin et al 1984 Tam and Webster's (1977) research indicated that the change in skin potential is the major source of motion artifact and proposed the method of skin abrasion to minimize this artifact. Odman and Oberg (1982) studied movement-induced potentials in various electrode configurations and concluded that potentials generated by skin deformation beneath the electrode dominate the disturbance pattern in ECG recording.…”
Section: Previous Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hamilton et al (Hamilton and Curley 1997, Hamilton et al 2000a, 2000b, 1999) mounted a strain gauge and an optical bend sensor on the exposed surface of an electrode respectively to measure electrode deformation as the noise reference.…”
Section: Previous Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Variable step size least mean square AF (VSS-LMS-AF) [6] was used to remove MA in the AECG signal. Two cascade AFs [7] were applied to prevent the signal saturation and track large sudden MA quickly.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When removing motion artifacts, the most common artifact references selected are accelerometers [10], however other sources such as optical bend sensors and impedance sensors [15] have also been assessed. Accelerometers are predominantly selected due to their high accuracy level combined with an ease of implementation which is critical for the assisted living domain.…”
Section: Adaptive Filteringmentioning
confidence: 99%