AI-Driven Real-Time Monitoring of Cardiovascular Conditions With Wearable Devices: Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular diseases remain the leading cause of mortality worldwide, accounting for 18 million deaths annually. Detection and prediction of cardiovascular conditions are essential for timely intervention and improved patient outcomes. Wearable devices offer a promising, noninvasive solution for continuous monitoring of cardiovascular signals, vital signs, and physical activity. However, the large data volumes generated by these devices and the rapid fluctuations in cardiovascular signals necessitate advanced artificial intelligence (AI) techniques for real-time analysis and effective clinical decision-making. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this scoping review was to identify the main challenges of AI-driven platforms for real-time cardiovascular condition monitoring with wearable devices and explore potential solutions. In addition, this review aimed to examine how AI algorithms are developed for robust monitoring and how deployment pipelines are optimized to enable real-time cardiovascular condition monitoring. METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted in the following electronic databases: MEDLINE(R) ALL (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Ovid), Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate), IEEE Xplore, and ACM Digital Library, yielding 2385 unique records. Inclusion criteria focused on studies that used wearable devices for participant data collection and applied AI algorithms for real-time analysis to detect or predict cardiovascular events and diseases. After title and abstract screening, 153 papers remained, and following a full-text review, 19 studies met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: The findings indicate that despite the promise of AI and wearable devices, research on real-time cardiovascular monitoring remains limited and lacks comprehensive validation. Most studies relied on publicly available wearable datasets rather than real-world validation with recruited participants in community settings. Studies that deployed AI algorithms in real time frequently failed to report operational characteristics and challenges. Electrocardiography-based wearable sensors were the most frequently used devices, primarily in hospital settings. A variety of AI techniques, ranging from traditional machine learning to lightweight deep learning algorithms, were deployed either on wearable devices or via cloud-based processing. CONCLUSIONS: Robust, interdisciplinary research is needed to harness the full potential of AI-driven, real-time cardiovascular health management using wearable devices. This includes the development and validation of scalable solutions for continuous community-based deployment. Furthermore, real-world challenges such as participant compliance, hardware and connectivity constraints, and AI model optimization for real-time continuous monitoring must be carefully addressed.
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 | 0.006 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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".