Digital Transformation in the Diagnostics and Therapy of Cardiovascular Diseases: Comprehensive Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The digital transformation of our health care system has experienced a clear shift in the last few years due to political, medical, and technical innovations and reorganization. In particular, the cardiovascular field has undergone a significant change, with new broad perspectives in terms of optimized treatment strategies for patients nowadays. OBJECTIVE: After a short historical introduction, this comprehensive literature review aimed to provide a detailed overview of the scientific evidence regarding digitalization in the diagnostics and therapy of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). METHODS: We performed an extensive literature search of the PubMed database and included all related articles that were published as of March 2022. Of the 3021 studies identified, 1639 (54.25%) studies were selected for a structured analysis and presentation (original articles: n=1273, 77.67%; reviews or comments: n=366, 22.33%). In addition to studies on CVDs in general, 829 studies could be assigned to a specific CVD with a diagnostic and therapeutic approach. For data presentation, all 829 publications were grouped into 6 categories of CVDs. RESULTS: Evidence-based innovations in the cardiovascular field cover a wide medical spectrum, starting from the diagnosis of congenital heart diseases or arrhythmias and overoptimized workflows in the emergency care setting of acute myocardial infarction to telemedical care for patients having chronic diseases such as heart failure, coronary artery disease, or hypertension. The use of smartphones and wearables as well as the integration of artificial intelligence provides important tools for location-independent medical care and the prevention of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Digital transformation has opened up multiple new perspectives in the cardiovascular field, with rapidly expanding scientific evidence. Beyond important improvements in terms of patient care, these innovations are also capable of reducing costs for our health care system. In the next few years, digital transformation will continue to revolutionize the field of cardiovascular medicine and broaden our medical and scientific horizons.
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 | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".