MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Incident atrial fibrillation prediction using ECG-based deep learning at a specialized tertiary cardiac care center

2024· article· en· W4403808545 on OpenAlexaff
Georges Jabbour, Alexis Nolin-Lapalme, L Moreau, L. Scimeca, Sewanou Hermann Honfo, Olivier Tastet, David Corbin, Paul Khairy, Rafik Tadros, Robert Avram

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationTertiary careCardiologyInternal medicineCardiac arrhythmiaCenter (category theory)Medical emergencyEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Deep learning (DL) applied to electrocardiograms (ECG) is an emerging modality in the prediction of incident atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter (AF). The generalizability of such methods to a tertiary heart center (THC) population has not yet been formally explored. Purpose Evaluate the performance of DL in predicting 5-year incident AF using a resting 12-lead ECG in sinus rhythm acquired at a THC. Methods In a retrospective study, we examined 1.4 million ECGs acquired from over 250,000 adults at a THC between 2004 and 2022. ECGs were excluded if they were performed within 30 days of cardiac surgery, captured a rhythm other than sinus rhythm, or were acquired in patients with pre-existing AF. Incident AF at 5 years was modelled as a binary outcome and was determined on the basis of available outpatient and inpatient clinical databases and ECG diagnoses. Included ECGs were randomly split by distributing patients into training (70%), validation (10%), and test (20%) sets. A ResNet-50 model was trained using the training set. Hyperparameters were optimized using the validation set. The tuned model's performance is reported on the test set. The results at the patient level were derived by averaging the model's probability outputs for ECGs grouped according to both their AF outcome and the patient's identity. Bootstrapping was used to report confidence intervals (CI). Sensitivity and specificity are reported at a classification threshold based on the Matthews correlation coefficient. Saliency maps were used to enhance the model’s explainability. Results A total of 669,782 ECGs (47% of the screened ECGs) were included among 145,323 patients. Mean age was 63±15 years and 62% were male. The 5-year incident AF outcome was observed in 12% of ECGs and 16% of patients. The performance of the tuned model was first evaluated at the ECG level on the test set demonstrating an area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) of 0.75 (95% CI: 0.745-0.753) and an integrated calibration index of 0.009 (95% CI: 0.008-0.011). When testing the model at the patient level to simulate a deployment scenario, the AUC improved to 0.78 (95% CI: 0.768-0.783) with a sensitivity of 50% (95% CI: 49-52) and specificity of 87% (95% CI: 86.5-87.3). Stratified results by sex showed a better AUC in females, 0.81 (95% CI: 0.80-0.82), compared to males, 0.75 (95% CI: 0.74-0.76). Subgroup analyses revealed a trend of improved performance at the patient level with an increasing number of ECGs. Saliency maps highlighted the P-wave area as having the highest influence on the model’s prediction, thereby enhancing the model’s plausibility and explainability. Conclusion A unimodal ECG-based deep learning model showed promising 5-year incident AF prediction performance in a cohort of all-comer patients at a tertiary heart center. Further studies could explore the use of multimodal prediction models that integrate ECGs with other clinical and imaging data.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.364
Threshold uncertainty score0.515

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart JournalSame topicECG Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207