Smartphone and new tools for atrial fibrillation diagnosis: evidence for clinical applicability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia in adults. AF increases the risk of heart failure, cardiac ischemic disease, dementia and Alzheimer's disease. Either clinical and subclinical AF increase the risk of stroke and worsen the patients' clinical outcome. The early diagnosis of AF episodes, even if asymptomatic or clinically silent, is of pivotal importance to ensure prompt and adequate thromboembolic risk prevention therapies. The development of technology is allowing new systematic mass screening possibilities, especially in patients with higher stroke risk. The mobile health devices available for AF detection are: smartphones, wrist-worn, earlobe sensors and handheld ECG. These devices showed a high accuracy in AF detection especially when a combined approach with single-lead ECG and photoplethysmography algorithms is used. The use of wearable devices for AF screening is a feasible method but more head-to-head comparisons between mHealth and medical devices are needed to establish their comparative effectiveness across different study populations.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".