The Role of AI in Cardiovascular Event Monitoring and Early Detection: Scoping Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) has shown exponential growth and advancements, revolutionizing various fields, including health care. However, domain adaptation remains a significant challenge, as machine learning (ML) models often need to be applied across different health care settings with varying patient demographics and practices. This issue is critical for ensuring effective and equitable AI deployment. Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), the leading cause of global mortality with 17.9 million annual deaths, encompass conditions like coronary heart disease and hypertension. The increasing availability of medical data, coupled with AI advancements, offers new opportunities for early detection and intervention in cardiovascular events, leveraging AI's capacity to analyze complex datasets and uncover critical patterns. Objective: This review aims to examine AI methodologies combined with medical data to advance the intelligent monitoring and detection of CVDs, identifying areas for further research to enhance patient outcomes and support early interventions. Methods: This review follows the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methodology to ensure a rigorous and transparent literature review process. This structured approach facilitated a comprehensive overview of the current state of research in this field. Results: Through the methodology used, 64 documents were retrieved, of which 40 documents met the inclusion criteria. The reviewed papers demonstrate advancements in AI and ML for CVD detection, classification, prediction, diagnosis, and patient monitoring. Techniques such as ensemble learning, deep neural networks, and feature selection improve prediction accuracy over traditional methods. ML models predict cardiovascular events and risks, with applications in monitoring via wearable technology. The integration of AI in health care supports early detection, personalized treatment, and risk assessment, possibly improving the management of CVDs. Conclusions: The study concludes that AI and ML techniques can improve the accuracy of CVD classification, prediction, diagnosis, and monitoring. The integration of multiple data sources and noninvasive methods supports continuous monitoring and early detection. These advancements help enhance CVD management and patient outcomes, indicating the potential for AI to offer more precise and cost-effective solutions in health care.
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 | 0.014 | 0.086 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".