Cited by 50Non-Invasive Vital Sign MonitoringHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlECG Monitoring and Analysis

Evaluation of the signal quality of wrist-based photoplethysmography

Open access
Pradhan, Nikhilesh, Rajan, Sreeraman, Adler, Andy·2019·Physiological Measurement

Abstract

Objective : Wearable devices with embedded photoplethysmography (PPG) sensors enable continuous monitoring of cardiovascular activity, allowing for the detection cardiovascular problems, such as arrhythmias. However, the quality of wrist-based PPG is highly variable, and is subject to artifacts from motion and other interferences. The goal of this paper is to evaluate the signal quality obtained from wrist-based PPG when used in an ambulatory setting. Approach : Ambulatory data were collected over a 24 h period for 10 elderly, and 16 non-elderly participants. Visual assessment is used as the gold standard for PPG signal quality, with inter-rater agreement evaluated using Fleiss’ Kappa. With this gold standard, 5 classifiers were evaluated using a modified 13-fold cross-validation approach. Main results : A Random Forest quality classification algorithm showed the best performance, with an accuracy of 74.5%, and was then used to evaluate 24 h long ambulatory wrist-based PPG measurements. Significance : In general, data quality was high at night, and low during the day. Our results suggest wrist-based PPG may be best for continuous cardiovascular monitoring applications during the night, but less useful during the day unless methods can be identified to improve low quality signal segments.

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 · 10.1088/1361-6579/ab225a

Cites

23 of 23 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?

  • Signal quality assessments have been done under more general circumstances, but wearable data quality in the context of epilepsy has not been a widely researched topic so far.

    “Signal quality assessments have been done under more general circumstances10,34–37, but wearable data quality in the context of epilepsy has not been a widely researched topic so far8,9,38.”

    From Data quality evaluation in wearable monitoring (2022) · cites this paper as [35]

  • The finding that overall data quality is higher during nighttime in the authors' large cohort is in line with findings in smaller samples specifically for PPG data.

    “This finding in our large cohort is in line with findings in smaller samples specifically for PPG data35,75.”

    From Data quality evaluation in wearable monitoring (2022) · cites this paper as [35]

  • The percentage of the artifact-corrupted PPG markedly increases during day-time, mostly due to device displacement and forearm motion.

    “In line with recent findings [48], our study shows that the percentage of the artifact-corrupted PPG markedly increases during day-time, mostly due to device displacement and forearm motion.”
  • In the ambulatory database, a quarter of the PPG duration was identified as corrupted by artifacts, which is higher than 10.8% reported in [10], but much lower than 44% in [12] and 65.2% in [48].

    “In the ambulatory database, a quarter of the PPG duration was identified as corrupted by artifacts, which is higher than 10.8% reported in [10], but much lower than 44% in [12] and 65.2% in [48].”
  • No artifact type-specific characteristics valuable for the model development were given in that study.

    “Yet, no artifact type-specific characteristics valuable for the model development were given.”

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

1 of the 24 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. R1 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Frank E, Hall M A and Witten I H 2016 The WEKA Workbench Online Appendix for 'Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques' 4th edn (San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers)
  3. Pradhan N 2017 Evaluation of the signal quality of wrist-based photo-plethysmography Master's Thesis Carleton University (https:// catalogue.library.carleton.ca/record=b4463881)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pradhan, N., Rajan, S., & Adler, A.
Affiliations
Carleton University (CA)
Corresponding author
Adler, Andy
Venue
Physiological Measurement
Published
2019-06-01
Volume
40
Issue
6
Pages
065008
ISSN
  • 0967-3334 (ISSN-L)
  • 1361-6579
OpenAlex
W2945703677
Cited by
50
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1
FWCI
1.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Physiological Measurement (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Non-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › ECG Monitoring and Analysis
Keywords
photoplethysmography, signal quality assessment, wearable sensors, ambulatory monitoring, motion artifacts, arrhythmia detection, cardiovascular monitoring, older adults, nocturnal monitoring, random forest classification
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Humans, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, Time Factors, Wrist, Photoplethysmography, Accelerometry

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