Cited by 274Non-Invasive Vital Sign MonitoringECG Monitoring and AnalysisHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control

Dynamic time warping and machine learning for signal quality assessment of pulsatile signals

Open access
Li, Q, Clifford, G D·2012·Physiological Measurement

Abstract

In this work, we describe a beat-by-beat method for assessing the clinical utility of pulsatile waveforms, primarily recorded from cardiovascular blood volume or pressure changes, concentrating on the photoplethysmogram (PPG). Physiological blood flow is nonstationary, with pulses changing in height, width and morphology due to changes in heart rate, cardiac output, sensor type and hardware or software pre-processing requirements. Moreover, considerable inter-individual and sensor-location variability exists. Simple template matching methods are therefore inappropriate, and a patient-specific adaptive initialization is therefore required. We introduce dynamic time warping to stretch each beat to match a running template and combine it with several other features related to signal quality, including correlation and the percentage of the beat that appeared to be clipped. The features were then presented to a multi-layer perceptron neural network to learn the relationships between the parameters in the presence of good- and bad-quality pulses. An expert-labeled database of 1055 segments of PPG, each 6 s long, recorded from 104 separate critical care admissions during both normal and verified arrhythmic events, was used to train and test our algorithms. An accuracy of 97.5% on the training set and 95.2% on test set was found. The algorithm could be deployed as a stand-alone signal quality assessment algorithm for vetting the clinical utility of PPG traces or any similar quasi-periodic signal.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1088/0967-3334/33/9/1491

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Bayesian networks, fuzzy state machines, logistic regression models, and association rules have been used for specific health monitoring tasks.

    “Some other examples are mentioned here: Bayesian network for classifying stress level [26,39] or for predicting patient's state [72], Fuzzy state machine for estimating the health status to provide alerts [68], logistic regression models [42] and association rules [41] to predict stress level and hospitalization of hemodialysis patients, respectively.”
  • Several approaches have been proposed for PPG signal quality assessment, including statistical analysis of pulse wave shape, perfusion index, template matching, dynamic time warping, and deep learning.

    “Several approaches have been proposed, including statistical analysis of pulse wave shape [56], assessing the level of perfusion through the perfusion index (the ratio of the amplitude of the pulsatile component of the PPG to its baseline) [56], assessing the similarity of successive pulse wave shapes using template matching [86] or dynamic time warping [87], and deep learning [88].”

    From Wearable Photoplethysmography for Cardiovascular Monitoring (2022) · cites this paper as [87]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 31 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Addison P S and Watson J N 2010 Signal processing techniques for determining signal quality using a wavelet transform ratio surface US Patent No. 2010/0298728 A1

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Li, Q., & Clifford, G. D.
Affiliations
  • Shandong University (CN)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
Venue
Physiological Measurement
Published
2012-08-17
Volume
33
Issue
9
Pages
1491-1501
ISSN
  • 0967-3334 (ISSN-L)
  • 1361-6579
OpenAlex
W1989977532
Cited by
274
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 5
FWCI
6.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Physiological Measurement (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Non-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › ECG Monitoring and Analysis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Keywords
photoplethysmogram, signal quality assessment, dynamic time warping, template matching, multilayer perceptron, arrhythmia detection, intensive care monitoring
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Artificial Intelligence, Humans, Quality Control, Time Factors, 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