ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Outcome Analysis in Elective Electrical Cardioversion of Atrial Fibrillation Patients: Development and Validation of a Machine Learning Prognostic Model.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
- Explainable machine learning model reveals its decision-making process in identifying patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation at high risk for recurrence after catheter ablation.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2023Trial
- Artificial Intelligence for Precision Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation: From Recurrence Prediction to Comparative Treatment Selection.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- AI-Driven Atrial Fibrillation Management: From Signal to Strategy.Balkan medical journal · 2026Review
- Atrial fibrillation in continuous flow-left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) patients: impact on pathophysiology.Journal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs · 2025Review
- Multidisciplinary Atrial Fibrillation Clinics: A Model for Comprehensive Management.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- Predicting the Outcomes of External Direct Current Cardioversion for Atrial Fibrillation: A Narrative Review of Current Evidence.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Atrial Fibrillation: From Early Detection to Precision Therapy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Machine learning and deep learning predictive models for prognosis in patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ digital health & AI · 2025Article
- The Application of Artificial Intelligence in Atrial Fibrillation Patients: From Detection to Treatment.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Longer and better lives for patients with atrial fibrillation: the 9th AFNET/EHRA consensus conference.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2024Article
- Machine Learning Prediction for the Recurrence After Electrical Cardioversion of Patients With Persistent Atrial Fibrillation.Korean circulation journal · 2023Article
- Artificial Intelligence for the Detection and Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation.Arrhythmia & electrophysiology review · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The integrated approach to electrical cardioversion (EC) in atrial fibrillation (AF) is complex; candidates can resolve spontaneously while waiting for EC, and post-cardioversion recurrence is high. Thus, it is especially interesting to avoid the programming of EC in patients who would restore sinus rhythm (SR) spontaneously or present early recurrence. We have analyzed the whole elective EC of the AF process using machine-learning (ML) in order to enable a more realistic and detailed simulation of the patient flow for decision making purposes. Methods: The dataset consisted of electronic health records (EHRs) from 429 consecutive AF patients referred for EC. For analysis of the patient outcome, we considered five pathways according to restoring and maintaining SR: (i) spontaneous SR restoration, (ii) pharmacologic-cardioversion, (iii) direct-current cardioversion, (iv) 6-month AF recurrence, and (v) 6-month rhythm control. We applied ML classifiers for predicting outcomes at each pathway and compared them with the CHA2DS2-VASc and HATCH scores. Results: With the exception of pathway (iii), all ML models achieved improvements in comparison with CHA2DS2-VASc or HATCH scores (p < 0.01). Compared to the most competitive score, the area under the ROC curve (AUC-ROC) was: 0.80 vs. 0.66 for predicting (i); 0.71 vs. 0.55 for (ii); 0.64 vs. 0.52 for (iv); and 0.66 vs. 0.51 for (v). For a threshold considered optimal, the empirical net reclassification index was: +7.8%, +47.2%, +28.2%, and +34.3% in favor of our ML models for predicting outcomes for pathways (i), (ii), (iv), and (v), respectively. As an example tool of generalizability of ML models, we deployed our algorithms in an open-source calculator, where the model would personalize predictions. Conclusions: An ML model improves the accuracy of restoring and maintaining SR predictions over current discriminators. The proposed approach enables a detailed simulation of the patient flow through personalized predictions.
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.