{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.030913012221423435, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007189072609633357, 'mean_word_length': 5.078602620087336, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Assessment of heart rate variability derived from finger-tip photoplethysmography as compared to electrocardiography

Heart rate variability (HRV) is traditionally derived from RR interval time series of electrocardiography (ECG). Photoplethysmography (PPG) also reflects the cardiac rhythm since the mechanical activity of the heart is coupled to its electrical activity. Thus, theoretically, PPG can be used for determining the interval between successive heartbeats and heart rate variability. However, the PPG wave lags behind the ECG signal by the time required for transmission of pulse wave. In this study, finger-tip PPG and standard lead II ECG were recorded for five minutes from 10 healthy subjects at rest. The results showed a high correlation (median = 0.97) between the ECG-derived RR intervals and PPG-derived peak-to-peak (PP) intervals. PP variability was accurate (0.1 ms) as compared to RR variability. The time domain, frequency domain and Poincaré plot HRV parameters computed using RR interval method and PP interval method showed no significant differences (p < 0.05). The error analysis also showed insignificant differences between the HRV indices obtained by the two methods. Bland-Altman analysis showed high degree of agreement between the two methods for all the parameters of HRV. Thus, HRV can also be reliably estimated from the PPG based PP interval method.