Skip to content
naulon
Not checkedNot checked for notices yet.

Performance Comparison for Ballistocardiogram Peak Detection Methods

Ahmad Suliman, Charles Carlson, Carl J. Ade and 2 more

IEEE Access · 2019

doi:10.1109/access.2019.2912650 (opens in a new tab)

We email you when a new notice or a question about this paper appears.

Abstract

A number of research groups have proposed methods for ballistocardiogram (BCG) peak detection toward the identification of individual cardiac cycles. However, objective comparisons of these proposed methods are lacking. This paper, therefore, conducts a systematic and objective performance evaluation and comparison of several of these approaches. Five peak-detection methods (three replicated from the literature and two adapted from code provided by the methods' authors) are compared using data from 30 volunteers. A basic cross-correlation approach was also included as a sixth method. Two high-performing methods were identified: the method proposed by Sadek et al. and the method proposed by Brüser et al. The first achieved the highest average peak-detection rate of 94%, the lowest average false alarm rate of 0.0552 false alarms per second, and a relatively small mean absolute error between the real and detected peaks: 0.0175 seconds. The second method achieved the lowest mean absolute error of 0.0088 seconds between the real and detected peaks, an average peak-detection success rate of 89%, and 0.0766 false alarms per second. All metrics are averaged across participants.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC-ND

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.