↓ Skip to main content

Hidden Signals—The History and Methods of Heart Rate Variability

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
77 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
277 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Hidden Signals—The History and Methods of Heart Rate Variability
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, October 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2017.00265
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gernot Ernst

Abstract

The understanding of heart rate variability (HRV) has increased parallel with the development of modern physiology. Discovered probably first in 1847 by Ludwig, clinical applications evolved in the second part of the twentieth century. Today HRV is mostly used in cardiology and research settings. In general, HRV can be measured over shorter (e.g., 5-10 min) or longer (12 or 24 h) periods. Since 1996, most measurements and calculations are made according to the standard of the Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and the North American Society of Pacing and Electrophysiology. As the first step, the series of times between successive R-peaks in the ECG are in milliseconds. It is crucial, however, to identify and remove extrasystoles and artifacts according to standard protocols. The series of QRS distances between successive heartbeats can be analyzed with simple or more sophisticated algorithms, beginning with standard deviation (SDNN) or by the square root of the mean of the sum of squares of differences between adjacent normal RR (rMSSD). Short-term HRV is frequently analyzed with the help of a non-parametric fast Fourier transformation quantifying the different frequency bands during the measurement period. In the last decades, various non-linear algorithms have been presented, such as different entropy and fractal measures or wavelet analysis. Although most of them have a strong theoretical foundation, their clinical relevance is still debated.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 277 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 277 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 38 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 10%
Student > Master 28 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 24 9%
Student > Bachelor 22 8%
Other 57 21%
Unknown 79 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 51 18%
Engineering 28 10%
Psychology 22 8%
Sports and Recreations 21 8%
Neuroscience 10 4%
Other 47 17%
Unknown 98 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 December 2023.
All research outputs
#14,684,843
of 25,507,011 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#3,932
of 14,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,077
of 335,629 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#42
of 93 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,507,011 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,240 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 335,629 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 93 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.