A Dataset and Benchmarks for Atrial Fibrillation Detection from Electrocardiograms of Intensive Care Unit Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia experienced by intensive care unit (ICU) patients and can cause adverse health effects. In this study, we publish a labelled ICU dataset and benchmarks for AF detection. Methods: We compared machine learning models across three data-driven artificial intelligence (AI) approaches: feature-based classifiers, deep learning (DL), and ECG foundation models (FMs). This comparison addresses a critical gap in the literature and aims to pinpoint which AI approach is best for accurate AF detection. Electrocardiograms (ECGs) from a Canadian ICU and the 2021 PhysioNet/Computing in Cardiology Challenge were used to conduct the experiments. Multiple training configurations were tested, ranging from zero-shot inference to transfer learning. Results: On average and across both datasets, ECG FMs performed best, followed by DL, then feature-based classifiers. The model that achieved the top F1 score on our ICU test set was ECG-FM through a transfer learning strategy (F1=0.89). Conclusion: This study demonstrates promising potential for using AI to build an automatic patient monitoring system. Significance: By publishing our labelled ICU dataset (LinkToBeAdded) and performance benchmarks, this work enables the research community to continue advancing the state-of-the-art in AF detection in the ICU. https://physionet.org/content/kingston-icu-af/
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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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".