Identifying Patients With Coronary Artery Disease Using Rest and Exercise Seismocardiography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coronary artery disease (CAD) is the most common cause of death globally. Patients with suspected CAD are usually assessed by exercise electrocardiography (ECG). Subsequent tests, such as coronary angiography and coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) are performed to localize the stenosis and to estimate the degree of blockage. The present study describes a non-invasive methodology to identify patients with CAD based on the analysis of both rest and exercise seismocardiography (SCG). SCG is a non-invasive technology for capturing the acceleration of the chest induced by myocardial motion and vibrations. SCG signals were recorded from 185 individuals at rest and immediately after exercise. Two models were developed using the characterization of the rest and exercise SCG signals to identify individuals with CAD. The models were validated against related results from angiography. For the rest model, accuracy was 74\%, and sensitivity and specificity were estimated as 75\% and 72\%, respectively. For the exercise model accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity were 81\%, 82\%, and 84\%, respectively. The rest and exercise models presented a bootstrap-corrected area under the curve of 0.77 and 0.91, respectively. The discrimination slope was estimated 0.32 for rest model and 0.47 for the exercise model. The difference between the discrimination slopes of these two models was 0.15 (95\% CI: 0.10 to 0.23, p < 0.0001). Both rest and exercise models are able to detect CAD with high accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. Performance of SCG is better compared to stress-ECG and it is identical to stress-echocardiography and CCTA. SCG examination is fast, inexpensive, and may even be carried out by laypersons.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".