MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404110692 · doi:10.2196/60697

The Role of Machine Learning in the Detection of Cardiac Fibrosis in Electrocardiograms: Scoping Review

2024· review· en· W4404110692 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Julia Handra, Hannah James, Ashery Mbilinyi, Ashley Moller‐Hansen, Callum O'Riley, Jason G. Andrade, Marc W. Deyell, Cameron Hague, Nathaniel M. Hawkins, Kendall Ho, Ricky Hu, Jonathon Leipsic, Roger Tam

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Cardio · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFaculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia
KeywordsPreprintMedicineField (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceComputer scienceCardiologyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of mortality worldwide. Cardiac fibrosis impacts the underlying pathophysiology of many cardiovascular diseases by altering structural integrity and impairing electrical conduction. Identifying cardiac fibrosis is essential for the prognosis and management of cardiovascular disease; however, current diagnostic methods face challenges due to invasiveness, cost, and inaccessibility. Electrocardiograms (ECGs) are widely available and cost-effective for monitoring cardiac electrical activity. While ECG-based methods for inferring fibrosis exist, they are not commonly used due to accuracy limitations and the need for cardiac expertise. However, the ECG shows promise as a target for machine learning (ML) applications in fibrosis detection. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to synthesize and critically evaluate the current state of ECG-based ML approaches for cardiac fibrosis detection. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of research in ECG-based ML applications to identify cardiac fibrosis. Comprehensive searches were performed in PubMed, IEEE Xplore, Scopus, Web of Science, and DBLP databases, including publications up to October 2024. Studies were included if they applied ML techniques to detect cardiac fibrosis using ECG or vectorcardiogram data and provided sufficient methodological details and outcome metrics. Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility and extracted data on the ML models used, their performance metrics, study designs, and limitations. RESULTS: We identified 11 studies evaluating ML approaches for detecting cardiac fibrosis using ECG data. These studies used various ML techniques, including classical (8/11, 73%), ensemble (3/11, 27%), and deep learning models (4/11, 36%). Support vector machines were the most used classical model (6/11, 55%), with the best-performing models of each study achieving accuracies of 77% to 93%. Among deep learning approaches, convolutional neural networks showed promising results, with one study reporting an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.89 when combined with clinical features. Notably, a large-scale convolutional neural network study (n=14,052) achieved an AUC of 0.84 for detecting cardiac fibrosis, outperforming cardiologists (AUC 0.63-0.66). However, many studies had limited sample sizes and lacked external validation, potentially impacting the generalizability of the findings. Variability in reporting methods may affect the reproducibility and applicability of these ML-based approaches. CONCLUSIONS: ML-augmented ECG analysis shows promise for accessible and cost-effective detection of cardiac fibrosis. However, there are common limitations with respect to study design and insufficient external validation, raising concerns about the generalizability and clinical applicability of the findings. Inconsistencies in methodologies and incomplete reporting further impede cross-study comparisons. Future work may benefit from using prospective study designs, larger and more clinically and demographically diverse datasets, advanced ML models, and rigorous external validation. Addressing these challenges could pave the way for the clinical implementation of ML-based ECG detection of cardiac fibrosis to improve patient outcomes and health care resource allocation.

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)0.002
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.908
Threshold uncertainty score0.617

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR CardioSame topicECG Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207