3 ms·
I would have thought that you could get pretty damn close with just some simple stats in frequency space normalised to the base frequency, i.e. Fourier transfor
by nicwilson 8y ago
I would have thought that you could get pretty damn close with just some simple stats in frequency space normalised to the base frequency, i.e. Fourier transform divided by the fundamental frequency.
- Tharkun 8y agoNot likely. Heart rhythm isn't so much about the rate at which the whole thing beats, it's rather a little more complicated than that. It's about the synchronization between different parts of the heart, about the way the signal propagates from the Sinus Node, about how it relates to the body's requested demand. Many things can go wrong. Many things do go wrong even in healthy hearts, for instance most people get ectopic beats every now and again, often without their knowledge. A simplistic FT approach would highlight stuff like that and no one would benefit from it.
- nicwilson 8y agoThats... not quite what I meant, perhaps I worded that a little bit weird. I meant frequency invariant, not amplitude normalised. As in divide the frequencies by the fundamental frequency (i.e. subtract their logs on the 'scope), not divide the amplitudes by the amplitude on the fundamental. Any deviation from the profile of the FT irrespective of its base frequency, from the normal sinus rhythm, would easily show. There might be a few problems dealing with cardiac load transitions, and I suppose if you are trying to differentiate the exact class of arrhythmia (as in the paper) then perhaps not, but differentiating normal (sinus), noise, abnormal it should work fine.