Clinical Validation of Wearable Piezoelectric Blood-Pressure Sensor

Re:Clinical Validation of Wearable Piezoelectric Blood-Press... by midland_trucker on Monday May 22, 2023 @03:34PM (#36035664)

I'm yet to see a study that convinces me of the potential of this concept. All of them when you get down to the details have at least one of:

  - An unrepresentative test set , i.e. a population with similar blood pressure at recording in which merely predicting a constant 'typical' reading would perform well in terms of accuracy.
  - A major methodology flaw, such as 'demonstrating' an ability to detect fluctuations from a baseline calibration cuff reading in situations where you would expect no significant fluctuations to occur.

I don't have access to this particular paper, but suspect it has the same issue owing to the relatively small sample size.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Clinical Validation of Wearable Piezoelectric Blood-Press... by saltcured on Monday May 22, 2023 @07:22PM (#36037963)

I find the topic interesting because it also seems to be one of these areas where a metric is being invented with no existing "gold standard", which is a different problem than just validating a new sensor to replace an existing one in the same methodology.

What does it mean to do continuous blood pressure monitoring? Do we have any idea how BP is supposed to behave continuously, when clinical standards are around a random sampling in particular resting postures? And do you have to account for all the fluid movements and pressure changes that happen during activity, with muscles contracting and body parts accelerating?

[ Parent | on HN ]