Development and validation of machine learning algorithms based on electrocardiograms for cardiovascular diagnoses at the population level
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiogram (ECG) algorithms are gaining prominence for the early detection of cardiovascular (CV) conditions, including those not traditionally associated with conventional ECG measures or expert interpretation. This study develops and validates such models for simultaneous prediction of 15 different common CV diagnoses at the population level. We conducted a retrospective study that included 1,605,268 ECGs of 244,077 adult patients presenting to 84 emergency departments or hospitals, who underwent at least one 12-lead ECG from February 2007 to April 2020 in Alberta, Canada, and considered 15 CV diagnoses, as identified by International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision (ICD-10) codes: atrial fibrillation (AF), supraventricular tachycardia (SVT), ventricular tachycardia (VT), cardiac arrest (CA), atrioventricular block (AVB), unstable angina (UA), ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-STEMI (NSTEMI), pulmonary embolism (PE), hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), aortic stenosis (AS), mitral valve prolapse (MVP), mitral valve stenosis (MS), pulmonary hypertension (PHTN), and heart failure (HF). We employed ResNet-based deep learning (DL) using ECG tracings and extreme gradient boosting (XGB) using ECG measurements. When evaluated on the first ECGs per episode of 97,631 holdout patients, the DL models had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of <80% for 3 CV conditions (PTE, SVT, UA), 80-90% for 8 CV conditions (CA, NSTEMI, VT, MVP, PHTN, AS, AF, HF) and an AUROC > 90% for 4 diagnoses (AVB, HCM, MS, STEMI). DL models outperformed XGB models with about 5% higher AUROC on average. Overall, ECG-based prediction models demonstrated good-to-excellent prediction performance in diagnosing common CV conditions.
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 | 0.009 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".