Toward ECG-based analysis of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a novel ECG segmentation method for handling abnormalities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Abnormalities in impulse propagation and cardiac repolarization are frequent in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), leading to abnormalities in 12-lead electrocardiograms (ECGs). Computational ECG analysis can identify electrophysiological and structural remodeling and predict arrhythmias. This requires accurate ECG segmentation. It is unknown whether current segmentation methods developed using datasets containing annotations for mostly normal heartbeats perform well in HCM. Here, we present a segmentation method to effectively identify ECG waves across 12-lead HCM ECGs. METHODS: We develop (1) a web-based tool that permits manual annotations of P, P', QRS, R', S', T, T', U, J, epsilon waves, QRS complex slurring, and atrial fibrillation by 3 experts and (2) an easy-to-implement segmentation method that effectively identifies ECG waves in normal and abnormal heartbeats. Our method was tested on 131 12-lead HCM ECGs and 2 public ECG sets to evaluate its performance in non-HCM ECGs. RESULTS: Over the HCM dataset, our method obtained a sensitivity of 99.2% and 98.1% and a positive predictive value of 92% and 95.3% when detecting QRS complex and T-offset, respectively, significantly outperforming a state-of-the-art segmentation method previously employed for HCM analysis. Over public ECG sets, it significantly outperformed 3 state-of-the-art methods when detecting P-onset and peak, T-offset, and QRS-onset and peak regarding the positive predictive value and segmentation error. It performed at a level similar to other methods in other tasks. CONCLUSION: Our method accurately identified ECG waves in the HCM dataset, outperforming a state-of-the-art method, and demonstrated similar good performance as other methods in normal/non-HCM ECG sets.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".