MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4289731377 · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocac122

Toward ECG-based analysis of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a novel ECG segmentation method for handling abnormalities

2022· article· en· W4289731377 on OpenAlexaff
Kasra Nezamabadi, Jacob J. Mayfield, Pengyuan Li, Gabriela V. Greenland, Sebastián Rodríguez, Bahadir Simsek, Parvin Mousavi, Hagit Shatkay, M. Roselle Abraham

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQRS complexSegmentationHypertrophic cardiomyopathyArtificial intelligenceMedicineAtrial fibrillationCardiologyRepolarizationInternal medicineElectrocardiographyPattern recognition (psychology)ST segmentComputer scienceElectrophysiologyMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.647
Threshold uncertainty score0.282

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.299 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Medical Informatics AssociationSame topicECG Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207