Suppr超能文献

胃肠道压力记录的计算机辅助分析。与人工评分的比较。

Computer-aided analysis of gastrointestinal pressure recordings. Comparison with manual scoring.

作者信息

Melsen N C, Andersen M B, Kraglund K, Juhl B

机构信息

Dept. of Anaesthesiology, University Hospital of Aarhus, Denmark.

出版信息

Scand J Gastroenterol. 1992 Sep;27(9):805-11. doi: 10.3109/00365529209011188.

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to compare computer-based and visual/manual scoring of pressure recordings from the gastric antrum and duodenum. The computer system was based on three separate principles of recognition: moving average, tracking base line, and threshold filters. Computer scoring resulted in the detection of more contractions than visual/manual scoring, owing to inclusion of artefacts of duration and amplitude above the selected thresholds. Owing to its unreliability, visual/manual scoring led to inclusion of some contractions of below-borderline amplitude or duration. The median difference in the frequency of contractions was, however, 0 min-1. There was close agreement on amplitudes of contractions. As the differences between visual/manual analysis and computer-aided scoring by the present system are of an unimportant magnitude and as computer-based scoring is consistent, we conclude that computer-aided analysis is preferable to visual/manual analysis.

摘要

本研究的目的是比较基于计算机的胃窦和十二指肠压力记录评分与视觉/手动评分。该计算机系统基于三种独立的识别原理:移动平均值、跟踪基线和阈值滤波器。由于将持续时间和幅度超过选定阈值的伪差包括在内,计算机评分检测到的收缩次数比视觉/手动评分更多。由于其不可靠性,视觉/手动评分导致纳入了一些幅度或持续时间低于临界值的收缩。然而,收缩频率的中位数差异为0次/分钟。收缩幅度方面存在密切一致性。鉴于视觉/手动分析与本系统的计算机辅助评分之间的差异不大,且基于计算机的评分具有一致性,我们得出结论,计算机辅助分析优于视觉/手动分析。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验