Clinical Validation of an Artificial Intelligence–Based Tool for Automatic Estimation of Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction and Strain in Echocardiography: Protocol for a Two-Phase Prospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Echocardiography (ECHO) is a type of ultrasonographic procedure for examining the cardiac function and morphology, with functional parameters of the left ventricle (LV), such as the ejection fraction (EF) and global longitudinal strain (GLS), being important indicators. Estimation of LV-EF and LV-GLS is performed either manually or semiautomatically by cardiologists and requires a nonnegligible amount of time, while estimation accuracy depends on scan quality and the clinician's experience in ECHO, leading to considerable measurement variability. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to externally validate the clinical performance of a trained artificial intelligence (AI)-based tool that automatically estimates LV-EF and LV-GLS from transthoracic ECHO scans and to produce preliminary evidence regarding its utility. METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study conducted in 2 phases. ECHO scans will be collected from 120 participants referred for ECHO examination based on routine clinical practice in the Hippokration General Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece. During the first phase, 60 scans will be processed by 15 cardiologists of different experience levels and the AI-based tool to determine whether the latter is noninferior in LV-EF and LV-GLS estimation accuracy (primary outcomes) compared to cardiologists. Secondary outcomes include the time required for estimation and Bland-Altman plots and intraclass correlation coefficients to assess measurement reliability for both the AI and cardiologists. In the second phase, the rest of the scans will be examined by the same cardiologists with and without the AI-based tool to primarily evaluate whether the combination of the cardiologist and the tool is superior in terms of correctness of LV function diagnosis (normal or abnormal) to the cardiologist's routine examination practice, accounting for the cardiologist's level of ECHO experience. Secondary outcomes include time to diagnosis and the system usability scale score. Reference LV-EF and LV-GLS measurements and LV function diagnoses will be provided by a panel of 3 expert cardiologists. RESULTS: Recruitment started in September 2022, and data collection is ongoing. The results of the first phase are expected to be available by summer 2023, while the study will conclude in May 2024, with the end of the second phase. CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide external evidence regarding the clinical performance and utility of the AI-based tool based on prospectively collected ECHO scans in the routine clinical setting, thus reflecting real-world clinical scenarios. The study protocol may be useful to investigators conducting similar research. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/44650.
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 | 0.049 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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".