MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412488540 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehaf448

Artificial intelligence-enhanced electrocardiography to predict regurgitant valvular heart diseases: an international study

2025· article· en· W4412488540 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yixiu Liang, Arunashis Sau, Boroumand Zeidaabadi, Joseph Barker, Konstantinos Patlatzoglou, Libor Pastika, Ewa Sieliwończyk, Zachary I. Whinnett, Nicholas S. Peters, Ziqing Yu, Xi Liu, Shuo Wang, Hongyang Lu, Daniel B. Kramer, Jonathan W. Waks, Yangang Su, Junbo Ge, Fu Siong Ng

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNIHR Imperial Biomedical Research CentreMedical Research CouncilMedical Research Council CanadaFudan UniversityBritish Heart FoundationBarwon Health FoundationNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineHazard ratiovalvular heart diseaseQuartileConfidence intervalElectrocardiographyRegurgitation (circulation)Mitral regurgitationProportional hazards model

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Valvular heart disease (VHD) is a significant source of morbidity and mortality, though early intervention can improve outcomes. This study aims to develop artificial intelligence-enhanced electrocardiography (AI-ECG) models to diagnose and predict future moderate or severe regurgitant VHDs (rVHDs), including mitral regurgitation (MR), tricuspid regurgitation (TR), and aortic regurgitation (AR). METHODS: The AI-ECG models were developed in a data set of 988 618 ECG and transthoracic echocardiogram pairs from 400 882 patients from Zhongshan Hospital, Shanghai, China. The AI-ECG models used a residual convolutional neural network with a discrete-time survival loss function. External evaluation was performed in outpatients from a secondary care data set from Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, USA, consisting of 34 214 patients with linked echocardiography. RESULTS: In the internal test set, the AI-ECG models accurately predicted future significant MR [C-index 0.774, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.753-0.792], AR (0.691, 95% CI 0.657-0.720), and TR (0.793, 95% CI 0.777-0.808). In age- and sex-adjusted Cox models, the highest risk quartile had a hazard ratio (HR) of 7.6 (95% CI 5.8-9.9, P < .0001) for risk of future significant MR, compared with the lowest risk quartile. For future AR and TR, the equivalent HRs were 3.8 (95% CI 2.7-5.5) and 9.9 (95% CI 7.5-13.0), respectively. These findings were confirmed in the transnational external test set. Imaging association analyses demonstrated AI-ECG predictions were associated with subclinical chamber remodelling. CONCLUSIONS: This study developed AI-ECG models to diagnose and predict rVHDs and validated the models in a transnational and ethnically distinct cohort. The AI-ECG models could be utilized to guide surveillance echocardiography in patients at risk of future rVHDs, to facilitate early detection and intervention.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.351 · 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 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

Citations17
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart JournalSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207