Cited by 307Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlReliability and Agreement in MeasurementHeart rate and cardiovascular health

The reliability of short-term measurements of heart rate variability

Sandercock, Gavin R.H., Bromley, Paul D., Brodie, David A.·2005·International Journal of Cardiology

Abstract

Short-term assessment of heart rate variability (HRV) is a non-invasive technique to examine ANS function. Within the literature, HRV is commonly referred to as a reliable measurement technique. The aim of this review was to assess the accuracy of this description based upon a comprehensive review of the available data concerning reliability of short-term HRV measures. Reviewing only studies using appropriate statistical analyses, it was determined that reliability coefficients for HRV measures were highly varied. Coefficients of variation ranged from 100%. Similar variation was found in studies using the intraclass correlation coefficient values, and limits of agreement. Reliability coefficients reported displayed some distinct patterns. Firstly, where measurements were made during interventions such as tilt or pharmacological stimulation, reliability was poorer than when HRV was measured at rest. Secondly, clinical populations displayed poorer reliability than healthy subjects. There was little effect of test-retest duration on reliability and although no single HRV measurement appeared less reliable than another, there was evidence that optimal data collection conditions for specific frequency domain measures exist. Describing HRV as a reliable measurement technique appears to be a gross oversimplification, as results of reliability studies are heterogeneous, and dependent on a number of factors. Further studies are required, particularly in clinical populations to assess…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijcard.2004.09.013

Cites

72 of 72 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sandercock, G. R. H., Bromley, P. D., & Brodie, D. A.
Corresponding author
Sandercock, Gavin R.H.
Venue
International Journal of Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-09
Volume
103
Issue
3
Pages
238-247
ISSN
0167-5273 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2072450200
Cited by
307
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 22
FWCI
1.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Cardiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart rate and cardiovascular health
Keywords
heart rate variability, measurement reliability, autonomic function, intraclass correlation coefficient, limits of agreement, test-retest reliability, clinical populations, healthy volunteers, sample size determination
MeSH terms
Heart Rate, Humans, Reproducibility of Results

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review