MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4403727798 · doi:10.7759/cureus.72311

The Role of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Cardiovascular Imaging and Diagnosis: Current Insights and Future Directions

2024· review· en· W4403727798 on OpenAlexaff
Maria Gabriela Cerdas, Sucharitha Pandeti, Inayat Grewal, Asiya Rawoot, Samia Anis, Jade Todras, Sami Chouihna, Y. Lysak

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineArtificial intelligenceCurrent (fluid)Machine learningMedical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are the major cause of mortality worldwide, emphasizing the critical need for timely and accurate diagnosis. Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) have become revolutionary tools in the healthcare system with significant potential for cardiovascular diagnosis and imaging. AI and ML techniques, including supervised and unsupervised learning, logistic regression, deep learning models, neural networks, and convolutional neural networks (CNNs), have significantly advanced cardiovascular imaging. Applications in echocardiography include left and right ventricular segmentation, ejection fraction measurement, and wall motion analysis. AI and ML hold substantial promise for revolutionizing cardiovascular imaging, demonstrating improvements in diagnostic accuracy and efficiency. This narrative review aims to explore the current applications, advantages, challenges, and future pathways of AI and ML in cardiovascular imaging, highlighting their impact on different imaging modalities and their integration into clinical practice.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.117
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureus→Same topicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education→French-language works237,207→