ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Improved Confidence-Interval Estimations Using Uncertainty Measure and Weighted Feature Decisions for Cuff-Less Blood-Pressure Measurements.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper presents a method to improve confidence-interval (CI) estimation using individual uncertainty measures and weighted feature decisions for cuff-less blood-pressure (BP) measurement. We obtained uncertainty using Gaussian process regression (GPR). The CI obtained from the GPR model is computed using the distribution of BP estimates, which provides relatively wide CIs. Thus, we proposed a method to obtain improved CIs for individual subjects by applying bootstrap and uncertainty methods using the cuff-less BP estimates of each subject obtained through GPR. This study also introduced a novel method to estimate cuff-less BP with high fidelity by determining highly weighted features using weighted feature decisions. The standard deviation of the proposed method's mean error is 2.94 mmHg and 1.50 mmHg for systolic blood pressure (SBP) and (DBP), respectively. The mean absolute error results were obtained by weighted feature determination combining GPR and gradient boosting algorithms (GBA) for SBP (1.46 mmHg) and DBP (0.69 mmHg). The study confirmed that the BP estimates were within the CI based on the test samples of almost all subjects. The weighted feature decisions combining GPR and GBA were more accurate and reliable for cuff-less BP estimation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.