Statements in which the resource exists.
SubjectPredicateObjectContext
pubmed-article:9809631rdf:typepubmed:Citationlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0554756lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:9809631lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C1704922lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:9809631lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0439830lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:9809631lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0806140lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:9809631lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C1523987lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:issue7lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:dateCreated1999-1-13lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:abstractTextTo characterize diastolic function from transmitral Doppler data, the image's maximum velocity envelope (MVE) is fit by a model for flow velocity. To reduce the physiologic beat-to-beat variability of best-fit determined model parameters, averaging of multiple cardiac cycles is indicated. To assess variability mathematically, we modeled physiologic noise as a random (normally-distributed) process and evaluated three methods of averaging (1, averaging model parameters from single images; 2, averaging images; and 3, averaging MVEs) using clinical datasets (50 continuous beats from 5 subjects). Method 2 generates a positive bias because low-velocity beats will not contribute to the composite MVE. The difference between Methods 3 and 1 is less than 2.0 E-5 (m/s)2 for uncorrelated model parameters. Input having 10% beat-to-beat variation yields a bias of <4% for model parameter mean. Hence, Method 1 was, in general, more robust than Method 3.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:granthttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:languageenglld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:journalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:citationSubsetIMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:statusMEDLINElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:monthSeplld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:issn0301-5629lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:authorpubmed-author:HallA FAFlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:authorpubmed-author:KovácsS JSJlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:authorpubmed-author:NudelmanS PSPlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:issnTypePrintlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:volume24lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:ownerNLMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:authorsCompleteYlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:pagination971-9lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:dateRevised2008-11-21lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:9809631-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:9809631-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:9809631-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:9809631-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:9809631-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:9809631-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:9809631-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:9809631-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:9809631-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:9809631-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:9809631-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:year1998lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:articleTitleBeat averaging alternatives for transmitral Doppler flow velocity images.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:affiliationCardiovascular Division, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:publicationTypeJournal Articlelld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:publicationTypeComparative Studylld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:publicationTypeResearch Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:9809631pubmed:publicationTypeResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tlld:pubmed