Cited by 661Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlNon-Invasive Vital Sign MonitoringCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention

How accurate is pulse rate variability as an estimate of heart rate variability?

Schäfer, Axel, Vagedes, Jan·2013·International Journal of Cardiology

Abstract

Background The usefulness of heart rate variability (HRV) as a clinical research and diagnostic tool has been verified in numerous studies. The gold standard technique comprises analyzing time series of RR intervals from an electrocardiographic signal. However, some authors have used pulse cycle intervals instead of RR intervals, as they can be determined from a pulse wave (e.g. a photoplethysmographic) signal. This option is often called pulse rate variability (PRV), and utilizing it could expand the serviceability of pulse oximeters or simplify ambulatory monitoring of HRV.Methods We review studies investigating the accuracy of PRV as an estimate of HRV, regardless of the underlying technology (photoplethysmography, continuous blood pressure monitoring or Finapresi, impedance plethysmography).Results/conclusions Results speak in favor of sufficient accuracy when subjects are at rest, although many studies suggest that short-term variability is somewhat overestimated by PRV, which reflects coupling effects between respiration and the cardiovascular system. Physical activity and some mental stressors seem to impair the agreement of PRV and HRV, often to an inacceptable extent. Findings regarding the position of the sensor or the detection algorithm are not conclusive. Generally, quantitative conclusions are impeded by the fact that results of different studies are mostly incommensurable due to diverse experimental settings and/or methods of analysis.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijcard.2012.03.119

Cites

112 of 112 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

2 of the 114 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schäfer, A., & Vagedes, J.
Affiliations
  • Academic Research in Complementary and Integrative Medicine (DE)
  • University Children's Hospital Tübingen (DE)
Corresponding author
Vagedes, Jan
Venue
International Journal of Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-06
Volume
166
Issue
1
Pages
15-29
ISSN
0167-5273 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W188715143
Cited by
661
References
114
Citations by year
2026: 59 · 2025: 51 · 2024: 56 · 2023: 52 · 2022: 57 · 2021: 72 · 2020: 67 · 2019: 49 · 2018: 59 · 2017: 40 · 2016: 40 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 1
FWCI
11.94
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
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Non-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Keywords
pulse rate variability, heart rate variability, photoplethysmography, pulse oximetry, RR interval, measurement accuracy, physical activity, psychological stress, sensor position, detection algorithm, ambulatory monitoring
MeSH terms
Electrocardiography, Heart Rate, Humans, Motor Activity, Pulse, Rest, Photoplethysmography

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