Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36344908›Full record

SynthesisHeart failure reviews2023

Artificial intelligence enabled ECG screening for left ventricular systolic dysfunction: a systematic review.

Laura Vindeløv Bjerkén, Søren Nicolaj Rønborg, Magnus Thorsten Jensen, Silas Nyboe Ørting, Olav Wendelboe Nielsen

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Heart failure reviews, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Reliability of Artificial Intelligence-enhanced Electrocardiography.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Laura Vindeløv BjerkénDepartment of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 3B, 2200, Copenhagen, Denmark. laura.bjerken@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-0767-0798
Søren Nicolaj RønborgDepartment of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-0675-3479
Magnus Thorsten JensenDepartment of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital Amager and Hvidovre, Hvidovre, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-0544-5215
Silas Nyboe ØrtingDepartment of Computer Science, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Olav Wendelboe NielsenDepartment of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 3B, 2200, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-3532-9431
University of Copenhagen · DKBispebjerg Hospital · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Screening for left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD), defined as reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), deserves renewed interest as the medical treatment for the prevention and progression of heart failure improves. We aimed to review the updated literature to outline the potential and caveats of using artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiography (AIeECG) as an opportunistic screening tool for LVSD.We searched PubMed and Cochrane for variations of the terms "ECG," "Heart Failure," "systolic dysfunction," and "Artificial Intelligence" from January 2010 to April 2022 and selected studies that reported the diagnostic accuracy and confounders of using AIeECG to detect LVSD.Out of 40 articles, we identified 15 relevant studies; eleven retrospective cohorts, three prospective cohorts, and one case series. Although various LVEF thresholds were used, AIeECG detected LVSD with a median AUC of 0.90 (IQR from 0.85 to 0.95), a sensitivity of 83.3% (IQR from 73 to 86.9%) and a specificity of 87% (IQR from 84.5 to 90.9%). AIeECG algorithms succeeded across a wide range of sex, age, and comorbidity and seemed especially useful in non-cardiology settings and when combined with natriuretic peptide testing. Furthermore, a false-positive AIeECG indicated a future development of LVSD. No studies investigated the effect on treatment or patient outcomes.This systematic review corroborates the arrival of a new generic biomarker, AIeECG, to improve the detection of LVSD. AIeECG, in addition to natriuretic peptides and echocardiograms, will improve screening for LVSD, but prospective randomized implementation trials with added therapy are needed to show cost-effectiveness and clinical significance.

Indexed as

Heart FailureVentricular Dysfunction, LeftElectrocardiographyHumansIntelligenceProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesStroke VolumeVentricular Function, LeftArtificial intelligenceElectrocardiogramLeft ventricular systolic dysfunctionReduced left ventricular ejection fractionScreening

Identifiers

PMID36344908
PMCPMC9640840
OpenAlexW4308590003

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.