MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4361856200 · doi:10.2196/44791

Feasibility of Artificial Intelligence–Based Electrocardiography Analysis for the Prediction of Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease in Patients With Stable Angina: Validation Study

2023· article· en· W4361856200 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jiesuck Park, Yeonyee E. Yoon, Youngjin Cho, Joonghee Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Cardio · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaMinistry of Trade, Industry and EnergyMinistry of Food and Drug SafetyKorea Medical Device Development Fund
KeywordsMedicineCoronary artery diseaseCardiologyInternal medicineReceiver operating characteristicUnstable anginaElectrocardiographyAnginaMyocardial infarctionCADAcute coronary syndromeArea under the curve

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite accumulating research on artificial intelligence-based electrocardiography (ECG) algorithms for predicting acute coronary syndrome (ACS), their application in stable angina is not well evaluated. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the utility of an existing artificial intelligence-based quantitative electrocardiography (QCG) analyzer in stable angina and developed a new ECG biomarker more suitable for stable angina. METHODS: This single-center study comprised consecutive patients with stable angina. The independent and incremental value of QCG scores for coronary artery disease (CAD)-related conditions (ACS, myocardial injury, critical status, ST-elevation myocardial infarction, and left ventricular dysfunction) for predicting obstructive CAD confirmed by invasive angiography was examined. Additionally, ECG signals extracted by the QCG analyzer were used as input to develop a new QCG score. RESULTS: Among 723 patients with stable angina (median age 68 years; male: 470/723, 65%), 497 (69%) had obstructive CAD. QCG scores for ACS and myocardial injury were independently associated with obstructive CAD (odds ratio [OR] 1.09, 95% CI 1.03-1.17 and OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.02-1.16 per 10-point increase, respectively) but did not significantly improve prediction performance compared to clinical features. However, our new QCG score demonstrated better prediction performance for obstructive CAD (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.802) than the original QCG scores, with incremental predictive value in combination with clinical features (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.827 vs 0.730; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: QCG scores developed for acute conditions show limited performance in identifying obstructive CAD in stable angina. However, improvement in the QCG analyzer, through training on comprehensive ECG signals in patients with stable angina, is feasible.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR CardioSame topicECG Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207