Key result
Raw Active Stand O2Hb and BP signals capture mortality and orthostatic intolerance better than pre-processed data.
Why the study?
The study aimed to investigate neurocardiovascular responses during an Active Stand test using pre-processed and raw signals to predict adverse outcomes including orthostatic intolerance, future falls, and mortality.
Does raw signal analysis of neurocardiovascular responses during an Active Stand test improve the prediction of orthostatic intolerance, falls, and mortality compared to pre-processed signals in older adults?
Cohort (n=2,794)
Does raw signal analysis of neurocardiovascular responses during an Active Stand test improve the prediction of orthostatic intolerance, falls, and mortality compared to pre-processed signals in older adults?
Raw signal analysis of neurocardiovascular responses during an Active Stand test improves risk stratification for orthostatic intolerance and mortality in older adults.
Background: This study aimed to investigate the neurocardiovascular responses during an Active Stand (AS) test, utilizing both pre-processed and raw signals, to predict adverse health outcomes including orthostatic intolerance (OI) during the AS, and future falls and mortality. Methods: A total of 2794 participants from The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA) were included. Continuous cardiovascular (heart rate (HR), systolic (sBP), and diastolic (dBP) blood pressure) and near infra-red spectroscopy-based neurovascular (tissue saturation index (TSI), oxygenated hemoglobin (O2Hb), and deoxygenated hemoglobin (HHb)) signals were analyzed using Statistical Parametric Mapping (SPM) to identify significant group differences across health outcomes. Results: The results demonstrated that raw (unprocessed) signals, particularly O2Hb and sBP/dBP, were more effective in capturing significant physiological differences associated with mortality and OI compared to pre-processed signals. Specifically, for OI, raw sBP and dBP captured significant changes across the entire test, whereas pre-processed signals showed intermittent significance. TSI captured OI only in its pre-processed form, at approximately 10 s post-stand. For mortality, raw O2Hb was effective throughout the AS test. No significant differences were observed in either pre-processed or raw signals related to falls, suggesting that fall risk may require a multifactorial assessment beyond neurocardiovascular responses. Conclusions: These findings highlight the potential utility of raw signal analysis in improving risk stratification for OI and mortality, with further studies needed to validate these findings and refine predictive models for clinical applications. This study underscores the importance of retaining raw data for certain physiological assessments and provides a foundation for future work in developing machine-learning models for early health outcome detection.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Feng et al. (2025) conducted a cohort in Orthostatic intolerance, falls, and mortality (n=2,794). Raw neurocardiovascular signal analysis during Active Stand test vs. Pre-processed signal analysis was evaluated on Orthostatic intolerance (OI) during the AS, future falls, and mortality. Raw neurocardiovascular signals during an Active Stand test, particularly O2Hb and blood pressure, were more effective than pre-processed signals in capturing mortality and orthostatic intolerance.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: