Key result
Wavelet transform was identified as a more appropriate method than the finite impulse response filter for processing and de-noising the fetal phonocardiogram signal based on subjective evaluation.
Why the study?
Does wavelet transform improve fetal phonocardiogram de-noising compared to FIR filter?
Does wavelet transform improve fetal phonocardiogram de-noising compared to FIR filter?
Wavelet transform appears to be a more appropriate method than FIR filtering for de-noising fetal phonocardiogram signals based on subjective evaluation.
Wavelet de-noising may improve fetal phonocardiogram quality; leaves open objective validation and clinical outcome assessment.
This work deals with fetal phonocardiogram (fPCG) processing. Two classical de-noising methods: wavelet transform (WT) method and the finite impulse response filter (FIR filter) are used and compared. For testing, real recordings were used and the evaluation was based on subjective observation and listening to signal improvement after performing individual methods. The results showed that both methods contributed to improved fPCG extraction from noise abdominal phonocardiogram (aPCG). On the basis of the subjective evaluation, in the end, we identified WT as a more appropriate method for processing the fPCG signal.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jaroš et al. (2018) studied Fetal phonocardiogram (fPCG) processing. Wavelet transform (WT) method vs. Finite impulse response filter (FIR filter) was evaluated on Subjective observation and listening to signal improvement. Wavelet transform was identified as a more appropriate method than the finite impulse response filter for processing and de-noising the fetal phonocardiogram signal based on subjective evaluation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: