ArticleJMIR human factors2022
Understanding Cardiology Practitioners' Interpretations of Electrocardiograms: An Eye-Tracking Study.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of eye-tracking technology in electrocardiogram interpretation research.European journal of medical research · 2025Pooled it
- Long Short-Term Memory-GPT-4 Integration for Interpretable Biomedical Signal Classification: Proof-of-Concept Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- RadGazeGen: radiomics and gaze-guided chest X-ray generation using diffusion models.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2026Article
- Computer-Based Competency Assessment in Point-Of-Care Ultrasound: A Systematic Review.AEM education and training · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence for direct-to-physician reporting of ambulatory electrocardiography.Nature medicine · 2025Article
- Evaluating the impacts of digital ECG denoising on the interpretive capabilities of healthcare professionals.European heart journal. Digital health · 2024Article
- Can Orthopaedic Surgeons adequately assess an Electrocardiogram (ECG) trace paper? A cross sectional study.Heliyon · 2023Article
- A cardiologist-like computer-aided interpretation framework to improve arrhythmia diagnosis from imbalanced training datasets.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2023Article
- Humanizing AI in medical training: ethical framework for responsible design.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2023Article
- Eye tracking technology in medical practice: a perspective on its diverse applications.Frontiers in medical technology · 2023Article
- Webcam-based eye-tracking to measure visual expertise of medical students during online histology training.GMS journal for medical education · 2023Article
- Non-conscious detection of ST-segment elevation during physician ECG interpretation.Journal of electrocardiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVisual expertise refers to advanced visual skills demonstrated when performing domain-specific visual tasks. Prior research has emphasized the fact that medical experts rely on such perceptual pattern-recognition skills when interpreting medical images, particularly in the field of electrocardiogram (ECG) interpretation. Analyzing and modeling cardiology practitioners' visual behavior across different levels of expertise in the health care sector is crucial. Namely, understanding such acquirable visual skills may help train less experienced clinicians to interpret ECGs accurately.
objectiveThis study aims to quantify and analyze through the use of eye-tracking technology differences in the visual behavior and methodological practices for different expertise levels of cardiology practitioners such as medical students, cardiology nurses, technicians, fellows, and consultants when interpreting several types of ECGs.
methodsA total of 63 participants with different levels of clinical expertise took part in an eye-tracking study that consisted of interpreting 10 ECGs with different cardiac abnormalities. A counterbalanced within-subjects design was used with one independent variable consisting of the expertise level of the cardiology practitioners and two dependent variables of eye-tracking metrics (fixations count and fixation revisitations). The eye movements data revealed by specific visual behaviors were analyzed according to the accuracy of interpretation and the frequency with which interpreters visited different parts/leads on a standard 12-lead ECG. In addition, the median and SD in the IQR for the fixations count and the mean and SD for the ECG lead revisitations were calculated.
resultsAccuracy of interpretation ranged between 98% among consultants, 87% among fellows, 70% among technicians, 63% among nurses, and finally 52% among medical students. The results of the eye fixations count, and eye fixation revisitations indicate that the less experienced cardiology practitioners need to interpret several ECG leads more carefully before making any decision. However, more experienced cardiology practitioners rely on their skills to recognize the visual signal patterns of different cardiac abnormalities, providing an accurate ECG interpretation.
conclusionsThe results show that visual expertise for ECG interpretation is linked to the practitioner's role within the health care system and the number of years of practical experience interpreting ECGs. Cardiology practitioners focus on different ECG leads and different waveform abnormalities according to their role in the health care sector and their expertise levels.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.