Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 May:2022:10.1109/icassp43922.2022.9747598.
doi: 10.1109/icassp43922.2022.9747598. Epub 2022 Apr 27.

UNSUPERVISED CLUSTERING AND ANALYSIS OF CONTRACTION-DEPENDENT FETAL HEART RATE SEGMENTS

Affiliations

UNSUPERVISED CLUSTERING AND ANALYSIS OF CONTRACTION-DEPENDENT FETAL HEART RATE SEGMENTS

Liu Yang et al. Proc IEEE Int Conf Acoust Speech Signal Process. 2022 May.

Abstract

The computer-aided interpretation of fetal heart rate (FHR) and uterine contraction (UC) has not been developed well enough for wide use in delivery rooms. The main challenges still lie in the lack of unclear and nonstandard labels for cardiotocography (CTG) recordings, and the timely prediction of fetal state during monitoring. Rather than traditional supervised approaches to FHR classification, this paper demonstrates a way to understand the UC-dependent FHR responses in an unsupervised manner. In this work, we provide a complete method for FHR-UC segment clustering and analysis via the Gaussian process latent variable model, and density-based spatial clustering. We map the UC-dependent FHR segments into a space with a visual dimension and propose a trajectory-based FHR interpretation method. Three metrics of FHR trajectory are defined and an open-access CTG database is used for testing the proposed method.

Keywords: cardiotocography; trajectory of contraction-dependent fetal heart rate segments; unsupervised clustering.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1:
Fig. 1:
Flowchart of the proposed method.
Fig. 2:
Fig. 2:
Data pre-processing and segmentation.
Fig. 3:
Fig. 3:
Example of sample distributions of normal and abnormal classes.
Fig. 4:
Fig. 4:
Example of trajectory of a FHR recording.
Fig. 5:
Fig. 5:
Five representative trajectories of FHR recordings. The left three are in normal class and the right two are in abnormal class.
Fig. 6:
Fig. 6:
Comparison of three metrics of trajectories from normal and abnormal FHR recordings.

Similar articles

Cited by

  • Approaches to Preventing Intrapartum Fetal Injury.
    Schifrin BS, Koos BJ, Cohen WR, Soliman M. Schifrin BS, et al. Front Pediatr. 2022 Sep 23;10:915344. doi: 10.3389/fped.2022.915344. eCollection 2022. Front Pediatr. 2022. PMID: 36210941 Free PMC article. Review.

References

    1. Ayres-de Campos D, “Electronic fetal monitoring or cardiotocography, 50 years later: what’s in a name?” American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, vol. 218, no. 6, pp. 545–546, 2018. - PubMed
    1. Sweha A, Hacker TW, and Nuovo J, “Interpretation of the electronic fetal heart rate during labor,” American family physician, vol. 59, no. 9, p. 2487, 1999. - PubMed
    1. Macones GA, Hankins GD, Spong CY, Hauth J, and Moore T, “The 2008 National Institute of Child Health and Human Development workshop report on electronic fetal monitoring: update on definitions, interpretation, and research guidelines,” Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, & Neonatal Nursing, vol. 37, no. 5, pp. 510–515, 2008. - PubMed
    1. Ayres-de Campos D, Spong CY, Chandraharan E, and Panel FIFMEC, “FIGO consensus guidelines on intrapartum fetal monitoring: Cardiotocography,” International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, vol. 131, no. 1, pp. 13–24, 2015. - PubMed
    1. Hruban L, Spilka J, Chudáček V, Janků P, Huptych M, Burša M, Hudec A, Kacerovskỳ M, Kouckỳ M, Procházka M et al., “Agreement on intrapartum cardiotocogram recordings between expert obstetricians,” Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 694–702, 2015. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources