↓ Skip to main content

Spectral fusion-based breathing frequency estimation; experiment on activities of daily living

Overview of attention for article published in BioMedical Engineering OnLine, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Spectral fusion-based breathing frequency estimation; experiment on activities of daily living
Published in
BioMedical Engineering OnLine, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12938-018-0533-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Iman Alikhani, Kai Noponen, Arto Hautala, Rahel Ammann, Tapio Seppänen

Abstract

We study the estimation of breathing frequency (BF) derived from wearable single-channel ECG signal in the context of mobile daily life activities. Although respiration effects on heart rate variability and ECG morphology have been well established, studies on ECG-derived respiration in daily living settings are scarce; possibly due to considerable amount of disturbances in such data. Yet, unobtrusive BF estimation during everyday activities can provide vital information for both disease management and athletic performance optimization. For robust ECG-derived BF estimation, we combine the respiratory information derived from R-R interval (RRI) variability and morphological scale variation of QRS complexes (MSV), acquired from ECG signals. Two different fusion techniques are applied on MSV and RRI signals: cross-power spectral density (CPSD) estimation and power spectrum multiplication (PSM). The algorithms were tested on large sets of data collected from 67 participants during office, household and sport activities, simulating daily living activities. We use spirometer reference BF to evaluate and compare our estimations made by different models. PSM acquires the least average error of BF estimation, [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text], compared to the reference spirometer values. PSM offers approximately 25 and 75% less error in comparison with the CPSD fusion estimation and the estimation by those two exclusive sources, respectively. Our results demonstrate the superiority of both of the fusion approaches, compared to the estimation derived from either of RRI or MSV signals exclusively.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 15%
Student > Bachelor 3 11%
Researcher 3 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Professor 2 7%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 9 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 7 26%
Engineering 5 19%
Psychology 3 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 7%
Neuroscience 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 July 2018.
All research outputs
#15,395,902
of 23,649,378 outputs
Outputs from BioMedical Engineering OnLine
#406
of 836 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#200,501
of 331,251 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BioMedical Engineering OnLine
#8
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,649,378 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 836 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,251 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.