↓ Skip to main content

SQI Quality Evaluation Mechanism of Single-Lead ECG Signal Based on Simple Heuristic Fusion and Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 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
SQI Quality Evaluation Mechanism of Single-Lead ECG Signal Based on Simple Heuristic Fusion and Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, June 2018
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2018.00727
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhidong Zhao, Yefei Zhang

Abstract

For both the acquisition of mobile electrocardiogram (ECG) devices and early warning and diagnosis of clinical work, high-quality ECG signals is particularly important. We describe an effective system which could be deployed as a stand-alone signal quality assessment algorithm for vetting the quality of ECG signals. The proposed ECG quality assessment method is based on the simple heuristic fusion and fuzzy comprehensive evaluation of the SQIs. This method includes two modules, i.e., the quantification and extraction of Signal Quality Indexes (SQIs) for different features, intelligent assessment and classification. First, simple heuristic fusion is executed to extract SQIs and determine the following SQIs: R peak detection match qSQI, QRS wave power spectrum distribution pSQI, kurtosis kSQI, and baseline relative power basSQI. Then, combined with Cauchy distribution, rectangular distribution and trapezoidal distribution, the membership function of SQIs was quantified, and the fuzzy vector was established. The bounded operator was selected for fuzzy synthesis, and the weighted membership function was used to perform the assessment and classification. The performance of the proposed method was tested on the database from Physionet ECG database, with an accuracy (Acc) of 97.67%, sensitivity (Se) of 96.33% and specificity (Sp) of 98.33% on the training set. Testing against the test datasets resulted in scores of 94.67, 90.33, and 93.00%, respectively. There's no gold standard exists for determining the quality of ECGs. However, the proposed algorithm discriminates between high- and poor-quality ECGs, which could aid in ECG acquisition for mobile ECG devices, early clinical diagnosis and early warning.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 16%
Student > Master 10 14%
Researcher 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 26 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 28 40%
Computer Science 4 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 4%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Mathematics 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 27 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 19 July 2018.
All research outputs
#20,527,576
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#9,525
of 13,846 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#288,116
of 328,559 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#399
of 505 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,846 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 328,559 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 505 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.