Cited by 62Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlVagus Nerve Stimulation ResearchNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring

Improving estimation of cardiac vagal tone during spontaneous breathing using a paced breathing calibration

Open access
Wilhelm, Frank H., Grossman, Paul, Coyle, Michael A.·2004·Instrument Society of America

Abstract

Respiratory sinus arrhythmia (RSA) is a commonly employed non-invasive measure of cardiac vagal control. It has been demonstrated that respiratory parameters such as tidal volume and respiratory frequency can change RSA without altering tonic vagal activity. Thus, within-individual comparisons of cardiac vagal control across different behavioral tasks might benefit from an adjustment for respiratory confounds. We tested an adjustment method using transfer function analysis and paced breathing at 3 different respiratory frequencies as the basis for regressing out respiratory related RSA changes in a task where breathing was not controlled. Electrocardiogram and calibrated respiration were recorded with the LifeShirt system from 15 young adult participants. Time series of RR intervals and lung volume change were computed and the respiration-to-RR-interval transfer-function magnitude (RSA-TF, in ms/liter) estimated. Mean (SD) of RSA-TF was 142 (68) at 9 breaths/min, 78 (52) at 13.5 breaths/min, 57 (43) at 18 breaths/min, and 121 (56) during baseline, with a respiratory frequency of 12.5 (3.8) breaths/min. At baseline, measured and predicted RSA-TF values (mean 94 +/- 82) differed significantly and correlated only moderately (r = 0.67). Factors contributing to a less than perfect correlation included slightly elevated subjective anxiety levels and hyperventilation during paced breathing, both of which may have affected cardiac vagal tone. This study demonstrates a novel procedure…

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.5451/unibas-ep9419

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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
Wilhelm, F. H., Grossman, P., & Coyle, M. A.
Affiliations
University of Basel (CH)
Venue
Instrument Society of America
Publisher
Instrument Society of America
Published
2004
Volume
40
Pages
317-24
OpenAlex
W2258745636
Cited by
62
References
21
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
FWCI
3.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • edoc (University of Basel) (acceptedVersion)
  • edoc (University of Basel)
  • PubMed
Funders
National Institute on Aging (P01AG018784)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Vagus Nerve Stimulation Research
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Non-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Keywords
cardiac vagal tone, respiratory sinus arrhythmia, transfer function analysis, respiratory rate, tidal volume, RR interval, anxiety, hyperventilation, cardiac vagal control
MeSH terms
Adult, Algorithms, Calibration, Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted, Electrocardiography, Female, Heart, Heart Rate, Humans, Respiration, Sensitivity and Specificity, Sinoatrial Node, Vagus Nerve, Reproducibility of Results, Respiratory Mechanics, Artifacts, Monitoring, Ambulatory

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