Performance Analysis of Ten Common QRS Detectors on Different ECG Application Cases

<div>Line graph for <svg height="8.68572pt" id="M35" style="vertical-align:-0.0498209pt" version="1.1" viewbox="-0.0498162 -8.6359 14.2836 8.68572" width="14.2836pt" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)"><path d="M584 650H137L131 622C214 614 217 612 200 521L125 127C109 41 101 35 23 28L17 0H288L294 28C201 35 193 42 209 128L242 309H348C440 309 442 300 443 226H471L510 422H482C452 354 449 348 357 348H251L295 575C302 609 304 615 338 615H426C502 615 517 604 526 581C534 560 536 524 537 492L565 494C574 554 583 631 584 650Z" id="g113-71"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,7.895,0)"><path d="M384 0V27C293 34 287 42 287 114V635C232 613 172 594 109 583V559L157 557C201 555 205 550 205 499V114C205 42 199 34 109 27V0H384Z" id="g113-50"></path></g></svg> results and histogram for the average time costs.</div>

Journal of Healthcare Engineering

fig2

Figure 2

Figure 2: Performance Analysis of Ten Common QRS Detectors on Different ECG Application Cases 