Review on Advent of Artificial Intelligence in Electrocardiogram for the Detection of Extra-Cardiac and Cardiovascular Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is that encompasses machine learning (ML) combined with human intelligence had begun to reform medical practices into a new dimension. Advancements and developments of AI molds improved diagnostics in the field of cardiology. Electrocardiogram (ECG) is a simple and cost-effective tool to identify cardiac disorder and which is its reason for being into practice till date. Increasing the population of ECG big data annually requires automatic analysis and immediate interpretation for improved diagnosis. Modern AI techniques like deep learning (DL)-based convolutional neural networks (CNNs) provide an improved way of cardiac disease management and diagnosis. This review throws a light over application of AI in ECG analysis and its necessity. Rich sets of clinical ECG data curated carefully as private and public access developed for various cardiac and extra-cardiac diseases management. Rather than human ECG interpretation, AI can move modern medicine toward more personalized patient care. The intention of this review article is to assess clinical and research possibilities, gaps, and jeopardies involved in cardiac anomalies detection using ECG measurement.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".