13 research outputs found
Estimating blood pressure trends and the nocturnal dip from photoplethysmography
Objective: Evaluate a method for the estimation of the nocturnal systolic blood pressure dip from 24-hour blood pressure trends using a wrist-worn Photoplethysmography (PPG) sensor and a deep neural network in free-living individuals, comparing the deep neural network to traditional machine learning and non-machine learning baselines. Approach: A wrist-worn PPG sensor was worn by 106 healthy individuals for 226 days during which 5111 reference values for blood pressure were obtained with a 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitor as ground truth and matched with the PPG sensor data. Features based on heart rate variability and pulse morphology were extracted from the PPG waveforms. Machine learning models (linear regression, random forests, dense neural networks and long- and short-term memory neural networks) were then trained and evaluated in their capability of tracking trends in systolic and diastolic blood pressure, as well as the estimation of the nocturnal systolic blood pressure dip. Main results Best performance was obtained with a deep long- and shortterm memory neural network with a Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) of 3.12±2.20 âmmHg and a correlation of 0.69 (p = 3 â 10â5) with the ground truth Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) dip. This dip was derived from trend estimates of blood pressure which had an RMSE of 8.22±1.49 mmHg for systolic and 6.55±1.39 mmHg for diastolic blood pressure. The random forest model showed slightly lower average error magnitude for SBP trends (7.86±1.57 mmHg), however Bland-Altmann analysis revealed systematic problems in its predictions that were less present in the long- and short-term memory model. SigniïŹcance The work provides ïŹrst evidence for the unobtrusive estimation of the nocturnal blood pressure dip, a highly prognostic clinical parameter. It is also the ïŹrst to evaluate unobtrusive blood pressure measurement in a large data set of unconstrained 24-hour measurements in free-living individuals and provides evidence for the utility of long- and short-term models in this domain
Mortality from gastrointestinal congenital anomalies at 264 hospitals in 74 low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries: a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study
Background: Congenital anomalies are the fifth leading cause of mortality in children younger than 5 years globally. Many gastrointestinal congenital anomalies are fatal without timely access to neonatal surgical care, but few studies have been done on these conditions in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared outcomes of the seven most common gastrointestinal congenital anomalies in low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries globally, and identified factors associated with mortality. // Methods: We did a multicentre, international prospective cohort study of patients younger than 16 years, presenting to hospital for the first time with oesophageal atresia, congenital diaphragmatic hernia, intestinal atresia, gastroschisis, exomphalos, anorectal malformation, and Hirschsprung's disease. Recruitment was of consecutive patients for a minimum of 1 month between October, 2018, and April, 2019. We collected data on patient demographics, clinical status, interventions, and outcomes using the REDCap platform. Patients were followed up for 30 days after primary intervention, or 30 days after admission if they did not receive an intervention. The primary outcome was all-cause, in-hospital mortality for all conditions combined and each condition individually, stratified by country income status. We did a complete case analysis. // Findings: We included 3849 patients with 3975 study conditions (560 with oesophageal atresia, 448 with congenital diaphragmatic hernia, 681 with intestinal atresia, 453 with gastroschisis, 325 with exomphalos, 991 with anorectal malformation, and 517 with Hirschsprung's disease) from 264 hospitals (89 in high-income countries, 166 in middle-income countries, and nine in low-income countries) in 74 countries. Of the 3849 patients, 2231 (58·0%) were male. Median gestational age at birth was 38 weeks (IQR 36â39) and median bodyweight at presentation was 2·8 kg (2·3â3·3). Mortality among all patients was 37 (39·8%) of 93 in low-income countries, 583 (20·4%) of 2860 in middle-income countries, and 50 (5·6%) of 896 in high-income countries (p<0·0001 between all country income groups). Gastroschisis had the greatest difference in mortality between country income strata (nine [90·0%] of ten in low-income countries, 97 [31·9%] of 304 in middle-income countries, and two [1·4%] of 139 in high-income countries; pâ€0·0001 between all country income groups). Factors significantly associated with higher mortality for all patients combined included country income status (low-income vs high-income countries, risk ratio 2·78 [95% CI 1·88â4·11], p<0·0001; middle-income vs high-income countries, 2·11 [1·59â2·79], p<0·0001), sepsis at presentation (1·20 [1·04â1·40], p=0·016), higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score at primary intervention (ASA 4â5 vs ASA 1â2, 1·82 [1·40â2·35], p<0·0001; ASA 3 vs ASA 1â2, 1·58, [1·30â1·92], p<0·0001]), surgical safety checklist not used (1·39 [1·02â1·90], p=0·035), and ventilation or parenteral nutrition unavailable when needed (ventilation 1·96, [1·41â2·71], p=0·0001; parenteral nutrition 1·35, [1·05â1·74], p=0·018). Administration of parenteral nutrition (0·61, [0·47â0·79], p=0·0002) and use of a peripherally inserted central catheter (0·65 [0·50â0·86], p=0·0024) or percutaneous central line (0·69 [0·48â1·00], p=0·049) were associated with lower mortality. // Interpretation: Unacceptable differences in mortality exist for gastrointestinal congenital anomalies between low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries. Improving access to quality neonatal surgical care in LMICs will be vital to achieve Sustainable Development Goal 3.2 of ending preventable deaths in neonates and children younger than 5 years by 2030
Recommended from our members
Non-standard errors
In statistics, samples are drawn from a population in a data-generating process (DGP). Standard errors measure the uncertainty in estimates of population parameters. In science, evidence is generated to test hypotheses in an evidence generating process (EGP). We claim that EGP variation across researchers adds uncertainty: Non-standard errors (NSEs). We study NSEs by letting 164 teams test the same hypotheses on the same data. NSEs turn out to be sizable, but smaller for better reproducible or higher rated research. Adding peer-review stages reduces NSEs. We further find that this type of uncertainty is underestimated by participants