Presage Arterial Pressure Waveform and Pulse Rate Model Card


THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION, AND PRESAGE'S SDK AND APP, ARE OFFERED FOR GENERAL WELLNESS AND INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. NEITHER HAVE BEEN CLEARED BY THE FDA AND NEITHER MAY BE USED FOR MEDICAL DIAGNOSIS OR TREATMENT.

1. Model Details

Basic info: Presage vitals by video analysis generates a relative arterial pressure waveform and pulse rate from a video of a subject. This card covers 10.6-second pulse rate (vs EKG) and 60-second waveform analysis (vs BP).

Organization: Presage Technologies

Model date: 2026-05-29

Model version: v3.1.0-rc.5

Model type: A proprietary computer vision and signal processing pipeline extracts a relative arterial pressure waveform and pulse rate from video of a subject. Pulse rate is compared against EKG at 10.6s windows. The waveform is z-score normalized and compared against the Biopac BP reference at 60s windows.

License: The algorithm is currently proprietary, and licenses are granted with predefined agreement.

Contact: Questions can be sent to: support@presagetech.com


2. Intended Use

Model Uses

This model was intended for use in the analysis and non-diagnostic utility of arterial pressure waveform morphology and pulse rate. Requires a stationary device and video of a subject acquired at 25+ fps. Pulse rate range: 40-180 BPM.

Out-of-Scope Uses

As noted above. Not intended for diagnostic blood pressure measurement. Does not provide absolute systolic, diastolic, or MAP values in mmHg. Not an arrhythmia detection or monitoring device.


3. Validation

Reference Standard: Biopac MP160 3-lead ECG (for pulse rate comparison at 10.6s windows) and Biopac continuous blood pressure monitor (for waveform correlation at 60s windows). Waveforms z-score normalized before comparison.

Comparison Methodology: Arterial Pressure Waveform measurements from the camera-based system were compared against time-aligned reference measurements. Ground truth signals were checked for quality using labeled signal annotations; segments with poor signal quality were excluded from analysis.


4. Data Demographics

Category Distribution
Total 119 subjects, 431 videos
Camera (videos) Logitech C920: 118, e-con See3CAM CU27: 115, Samsung S24 Rear 24mm (tripod): 101, Samsung S24 Front 27mm (handheld): 97
Sex (subjects) Female: 63, Male: 56
Age Group (subjects) 18-25: 37, 26-35: 36, 36-45: 18, 46-55: 15, 56-65: 10, 65+: 2
Fitzpatrick (subjects) Type 1: 21, Type 2: 13, Type 3: 13, Type 4: 24, Type 5: 33, Type 6: 15
BMI (subjects) Mean: 27.9, Range: 16.5–54.3, N=119
Lighting (videos) Lamp: 137, Ring Light: 133, Window: 105

Reference standard: Biopac EKG and continuous blood pressure monitor.


5. Data Provenance

Reference Instrumentation: Biopac research-grade physiological sensors: 3-lead ECG (for pulse rate ground truth), continuous blood pressure monitor (for waveform correlation ground truth).

Camera Devices Tested: Samsung S24 Rear 24mm (tripod), Samsung S24 Front 27mm (handheld), e-con See3CAM CU27 (USB), Logitech C920 (tripod).

Average Camera Distance: Samsung S24/e-con/Logitech: 26", Samsung S24 handheld: 10"

Data Handling: All subject data is de-identified. Derived metrics and anonymized identifiers are retained. Data is securely stored with access restricted to trained researchers.


6. Factors

The arterial pressure model requires face detection and high-quality photoplethysmographic signal extraction.


These factors can affect model performance:


Lighting Conditions Tested:


Other factors:


7. Metrics

(at 80% Return Rate, Confidence >= 97)

  1. MAE: 0.41 BPM
  2. RMSE: 0.67 BPM

8. Quantitative Analysis

Computed vs Ground Truth at Confidence Thresholds

Bland-Altman Plot

Confidence Lookup Table

Confidence >= MAE (BPM) RMSE (BPM) Pearson r Return Rate (%) N (samples)
0 1.11 3.07 0.971 100.0 16999
10 1.06 2.88 0.975 99.6 16936
20 1.03 2.80 0.976 99.4 16889
30 0.99 2.69 0.978 98.9 16814
40 0.92 2.51 0.981 98.2 16686
50 0.84 2.22 0.985 97.1 16502
60 0.73 1.89 0.989 95.5 16241
65 0.69 1.75 0.991 94.8 16112
70 0.63 1.52 0.993 93.8 15948
75 0.60 1.42 0.994 93.1 15819
80 0.55 1.22 0.996 91.9 15630
85 0.51 1.03 0.997 90.5 15384
90 0.48 0.87 0.998 88.5 15052
95 0.44 0.74 0.998 84.1 14297
97 0.41 0.67 0.999 80.0 13390

Performance

(at 80% Return Rate, Confidence >= 97)

By Camera Type

Camera Type N (samples) Return Rate (%) MAE (BPM) RMSE (BPM) Pearson r
Samsung S24 Rear 24mm (tripod) 3875 85.8 0.41 0.76 0.998
Samsung S24 Front 27mm (handheld) 1091 65.1 0.49 0.89 0.998
e-con See3CAM CU27 4164 77.6 0.42 0.63 0.999
Logitech C920 4260 78.3 0.36 0.52 0.999

By Fitzpatrick Skin Type

Fitzpatrick N (samples) Return Rate (%) MAE (BPM) RMSE (BPM) Pearson r
Type I 2647 93.9 0.39 0.61 0.999
Type II 1504 84.5 0.40 0.75 0.998
Type III 1522 85.2 0.49 0.96 0.998
Type IV 3160 87.8 0.38 0.57 0.999
Type V 3686 75.3 0.39 0.54 0.999
Type VI 871 41.1 0.49 0.81 0.998
Fitzpatrick Type VI: Breakdown by Lighting Condition
Ring Light 349 50.3 0.42 0.58 0.997
Window 178 29.4 0.51 0.78 0.999
Lamp 254 35.4 0.50 1.06 0.985

Note: Types I-V are composites across all lighting conditions (Ring Light, Window, Lamp).

By Sex

Sex N (samples) Return Rate (%) MAE (BPM) RMSE (BPM) Pearson r
Male 6786 82.2 0.39 0.69 0.999
Female 6604 75.5 0.42 0.64 0.999

By Age Group

Age Group N (samples) Return Rate (%) MAE (BPM) RMSE (BPM) Pearson r
18-25 4291 79.2 0.48 0.78 0.998
26-35 3917 76.5 0.40 0.59 0.999
36-45 1778 77.7 0.47 0.83 0.998
46-55 1891 88.0 0.26 0.37 1.000
56-65 1364 82.2 0.29 0.41 0.999
65+ 66 25.9 0.47 0.71 0.999

By Lighting Type

Lighting N (samples) Return Rate (%) MAE (BPM) RMSE (BPM) Pearson r
Lamp 3901 75.4 0.43 0.76 0.998
Ring Light 4543 83.1 0.38 0.53 0.999
Window 2718 70.0 0.42 0.67 0.998

Confidence vs Waveform Correlation

Confidence >= Waveform Pearson r Return Rate (%) N (videos)
0 0.618 100.0 377
10 0.618 100.0 377
20 0.619 99.7 376
30 0.619 99.7 376
40 0.620 99.5 375
50 0.627 97.6 368
60 0.632 96.0 362
65 0.635 94.2 355
70 0.639 92.3 348
75 0.641 90.7 342
80 0.644 89.1 336
85 0.651 85.9 324
90 0.656 81.7 308
95 0.663 76.4 288

Waveform Example


9. Fairness & Equity

Bias Assessment Methodology: Performance is stratified by Fitzpatrick skin type (I-VI), sex, camera type, and age group. Per-group metrics and Confidence averages are reported in the Quantitative Analysis tables above.


10. Ethical Considerations

As a remote sensing device, the risks posed to the subjects in the trial are minimal, including the association of each subject with corresponding biometric data. Mitigation of these risks include de-identifying all subject data, including videos, prior to saving it. Additionally, all data is securely stored with access to a select number of trained researchers.

The model is not intended for human life-critical decisions, diagnostics or prognostication.

11. Limitations and Tradeoffs