Performance Comparison for Ballistocardiogram Peak Detection Methods

• Published in: IEEE access 2019, Vol.7, p.53945-53955
• Main Authors: Suliman, Ahmad, Carlson, Charles, Ade, Carl J., Warren, Steve, Thompson, David E.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Alarms; Ballistocardiogram; Ballistocardiograms; Electrocardiography; False alarms; heart rate; Heart rate variability; heartbeat; heartbeat interval; Indexes; load cells; Measurement; Methods; Monitoring; Performance evaluation; Signal processing; Signal processing algorithms; statistical signal analysis; wavelets
• ISSN: 2169-3536; 2169-3536
• DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2912650

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.