Cargando…

Artefact Detection in Impedance Pneumography Signals: A Machine Learning Approach

Impedance pneumography has been suggested as an ambulatory technique for the monitoring of respiratory diseases. However, its ambulatory nature makes the recordings more prone to noise sources. It is important that such noisy segments are identified and removed, since they could have a huge impact o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Moeyersons, Jonathan, Morales, John, Seeuws, Nick, Van Hoof, Chris, Hermeling, Evelien, Groenendaal, Willemijn, Willems, Rik, Van Huffel, Sabine, Varon, Carolina
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8068282/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33917824
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21082613
_version_ 1783682999523475456
author Moeyersons, Jonathan
Morales, John
Seeuws, Nick
Van Hoof, Chris
Hermeling, Evelien
Groenendaal, Willemijn
Willems, Rik
Van Huffel, Sabine
Varon, Carolina
author_facet Moeyersons, Jonathan
Morales, John
Seeuws, Nick
Van Hoof, Chris
Hermeling, Evelien
Groenendaal, Willemijn
Willems, Rik
Van Huffel, Sabine
Varon, Carolina
author_sort Moeyersons, Jonathan
collection PubMed
description Impedance pneumography has been suggested as an ambulatory technique for the monitoring of respiratory diseases. However, its ambulatory nature makes the recordings more prone to noise sources. It is important that such noisy segments are identified and removed, since they could have a huge impact on the performance of data-driven decision support tools. In this study, we investigated the added value of machine learning algorithms to separate clean from noisy bio-impedance signals. We compared three approaches: a heuristic algorithm, a feature-based classification model (SVM) and a convolutional neural network (CNN). The dataset consists of 47 chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients who performed an inspiratory threshold loading protocol. During this protocol, their respiration was recorded with a bio-impedance device and a spirometer, which served as a gold standard. Four annotators scored the signals for the presence of artefacts, based on the reference signal. We have shown that the accuracy of both machine learning approaches (SVM: 87.77 ± 2.64% and CNN: 87.20 ± 2.78%) is significantly higher, compared to the heuristic approach (84.69 ± 2.32%). Moreover, no significant differences could be observed between the two machine learning approaches. The feature-based and neural network model obtained a respective AUC of [Formula: see text] % and [Formula: see text] %. These findings show that a data-driven approach could be beneficial for the task of artefact detection in respiratory thoracic bio-impedance signals.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8068282
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80682822021-04-25 Artefact Detection in Impedance Pneumography Signals: A Machine Learning Approach Moeyersons, Jonathan Morales, John Seeuws, Nick Van Hoof, Chris Hermeling, Evelien Groenendaal, Willemijn Willems, Rik Van Huffel, Sabine Varon, Carolina Sensors (Basel) Article Impedance pneumography has been suggested as an ambulatory technique for the monitoring of respiratory diseases. However, its ambulatory nature makes the recordings more prone to noise sources. It is important that such noisy segments are identified and removed, since they could have a huge impact on the performance of data-driven decision support tools. In this study, we investigated the added value of machine learning algorithms to separate clean from noisy bio-impedance signals. We compared three approaches: a heuristic algorithm, a feature-based classification model (SVM) and a convolutional neural network (CNN). The dataset consists of 47 chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients who performed an inspiratory threshold loading protocol. During this protocol, their respiration was recorded with a bio-impedance device and a spirometer, which served as a gold standard. Four annotators scored the signals for the presence of artefacts, based on the reference signal. We have shown that the accuracy of both machine learning approaches (SVM: 87.77 ± 2.64% and CNN: 87.20 ± 2.78%) is significantly higher, compared to the heuristic approach (84.69 ± 2.32%). Moreover, no significant differences could be observed between the two machine learning approaches. The feature-based and neural network model obtained a respective AUC of [Formula: see text] % and [Formula: see text] %. These findings show that a data-driven approach could be beneficial for the task of artefact detection in respiratory thoracic bio-impedance signals. MDPI 2021-04-08 /pmc/articles/PMC8068282/ /pubmed/33917824 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21082613 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Moeyersons, Jonathan
Morales, John
Seeuws, Nick
Van Hoof, Chris
Hermeling, Evelien
Groenendaal, Willemijn
Willems, Rik
Van Huffel, Sabine
Varon, Carolina
Artefact Detection in Impedance Pneumography Signals: A Machine Learning Approach
title Artefact Detection in Impedance Pneumography Signals: A Machine Learning Approach
title_full Artefact Detection in Impedance Pneumography Signals: A Machine Learning Approach
title_fullStr Artefact Detection in Impedance Pneumography Signals: A Machine Learning Approach
title_full_unstemmed Artefact Detection in Impedance Pneumography Signals: A Machine Learning Approach
title_short Artefact Detection in Impedance Pneumography Signals: A Machine Learning Approach
title_sort artefact detection in impedance pneumography signals: a machine learning approach
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8068282/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33917824
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21082613
work_keys_str_mv AT moeyersonsjonathan artefactdetectioninimpedancepneumographysignalsamachinelearningapproach
AT moralesjohn artefactdetectioninimpedancepneumographysignalsamachinelearningapproach
AT seeuwsnick artefactdetectioninimpedancepneumographysignalsamachinelearningapproach
AT vanhoofchris artefactdetectioninimpedancepneumographysignalsamachinelearningapproach
AT hermelingevelien artefactdetectioninimpedancepneumographysignalsamachinelearningapproach
AT groenendaalwillemijn artefactdetectioninimpedancepneumographysignalsamachinelearningapproach
AT willemsrik artefactdetectioninimpedancepneumographysignalsamachinelearningapproach
AT vanhuffelsabine artefactdetectioninimpedancepneumographysignalsamachinelearningapproach
AT varoncarolina artefactdetectioninimpedancepneumographysignalsamachinelearningapproach