Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36713602›Full record

ArticleEuropean heart journal. Digital health2021

Uncertainty estimation for deep learning-based automated analysis of 12-lead electrocardiograms.

Jeroen F Vranken, Rutger R van de Leur, Deepak K Gupta, Luis E Juarez Orozco, Rutger J Hassink, Pim van der Harst, Pieter A Doevendans, Sadaf Gulshad, René van Es

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European heart journal. Digital health, 2021. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Adopting artificial intelligence in cardiovascular medicine: a scoping review.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. [Artificial intelligence in wearable electrocardiogram monitoring].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. 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

9 authors.

Jeroen F VrankenDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Rutger R van de LeurDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4779-5870
Deepak K GuptaInformatics Institute, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Luis E Juarez OrozcoDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Rutger J HassinkDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Pim van der HarstDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Pieter A DoevendansDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Sadaf GulshadInformatics Institute, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
René van EsDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aims: Automated interpretation of electrocardiograms (ECGs) using deep neural networks (DNNs) has gained much attention recently. While the initial results have been encouraging, limited attention has been paid to whether such results can be trusted, which is paramount for their clinical implementation. This study aims to systematically investigate uncertainty estimation techniques for automated classification of ECGs using DNNs and to gain insight into its utility through a clinical simulation. Methods and results: On a total of 526 656 ECGs from three different datasets, six different methods for estimation of aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty were systematically investigated. The methods were evaluated based on ranking, calibration, and robustness against out-of-distribution data. Furthermore, a clinical simulation was performed where increasing uncertainty thresholds were applied to achieve a clinically acceptable performance. Finally, the correspondence between the uncertainty of ECGs and the lack of interpretational agreement between cardiologists was estimated. Results demonstrated the largest benefit when modelling both epistemic and aleatoric uncertainty. Notably, the combination of variational inference with Bayesian decomposition and ensemble with auxiliary output outperformed the other methods. The clinical simulation showed that the accuracy of the algorithm increased as uncertain predictions were referred to the physician. Moreover, high uncertainty in DNN-based ECG classification strongly corresponded with a lower diagnostic agreement in cardiologist's interpretation ( Conclusion: Uncertainty estimation is warranted in automated DNN-based ECG classification and its accurate estimation enables intermediate quality control in the clinical implementation of deep learning. This is an important step towards the clinical applicability of automated ECG diagnosis using DNNs.

Indexed as

Clinical implementationDeep learningElectrocardiogramTriageUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID36713602
PMCPMC9707930

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.