Differentiating Ischemic From Nonischemic T-Wave Inversion Using a Multimodal Vision-Language Model With Reinforcement Learning (ECG-R1): Development and Validation Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background The differentiation of primary ischemic from secondary nonischemic T-wave inversion (TWI) on electrocardiograms (ECGs) presents a critical and pervasive diagnostic challenge in emergency cardiology. Historical clinical literature reports that clinician-led visual interpretation of isolated TWI yields a positive predictive value of only approximately 50% due to profound morphological ambiguity. This high degree of uncertainty frequently leads to high false-positive rates, resulting in unnecessary, costly, and potentially risky invasive angiographic procedures for patients. Furthermore, although existing deep learning models have attempted to address this clinical bottleneck, they are frequently limited to single-modality, “black box” architectures. Their inability to process complex multimodal data or provide transparent reasoning traces fundamentally limits clinical trust and real-world adoption. Objective The objective of this study was to develop a novel diagnostic framework designed to address the critical clinical challenge of accurately differentiating ischemic from nonischemic TWI. By using a multimodal vision-language model trained with a reinforcement learning (RL) paradigm, this study aimed to improve diagnostic accuracy and provide interpretable reasoning. Methods We developed ECG-R1, a multimodal framework using the Qwen2-VL-2B vision-language model, to analyze ECG waveform images and associated clinical text. Instead of supervised fine-tuning (SFT), the model was trained using an RL paradigm with the group relative policy optimization algorithm. The model was trained to generate a structured output containing an explicit reasoning trace and a final “yes” or “no” answer. A 2-component, rule-based reward function was designed to assess format adherence and diagnostic accuracy. Performance was compared against strong SFT baselines. Results Evaluated on a large-scale multimodal dataset of 12,917 TWI cases, our ECG-R1 model achieved a state-of-the-art in-domain accuracy of 75.21%, a sensitivity of 82.55%, and an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 84.18%. The model demonstrated robust cross-hospital generalization, maintaining a 72.93% out-of-domain accuracy and an 81.56% area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. When controlling for model scale, the RL paradigm yielded substantial absolute improvements of 6.69% in in-domain performance and a substantial 11.48% improvement in out-of-domain performance over the capacity-matched Qwen2-VL-2B full-FT baseline. These results suggested that the RL approach was superior for learning invariant physiological features rather than overfitting to source-domain artifacts. Conclusions The RL-based ECG-R1 framework significantly outperformed capacity-matched SFT baselines in both diagnostic accuracy and cross-domain robustness. By explicitly modeling interpretable clinical reasoning and using probabilistic diagnostic language to prevent premature cognitive closure, ECG-R1 may serve as a highly transparent clinical decision support system. It was structurally designed to safely assist cardiologists within a strict human-in-the-loop paradigm, establishing a robust foundation for prospective clinical trials.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».