ArticleKorean circulation journal2023
Machine Learning Prediction for the Recurrence After Electrical Cardioversion of Patients With Persistent Atrial Fibrillation.
Article in Korean circulation journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial Intelligence for Precision Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation: From Recurrence Prediction to Comparative Treatment Selection.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Machine Learning and Arrhythmia: Advances in Atrial Fibrillation Detection and Management.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2025Review
- Enhancing Prognostic Accuracy in Chronic Total Occlusion: Opportunities and Challenges of Machine Learning-Based Prediction.Korean circulation journal · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Cardiac Electrophysiology: A Clinically Oriented Review with Engineering Primers.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
- 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
- Echocardiographic Assessment of Left Atrial Mechanics in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Electrical Cardioversion: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Neuromodulation for Atrial Fibrillation Control.Korean circulation journal · 2024Review
- Machine Learning for Predicting Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence After Cardioversion: A Modest Leap Forward.Korean circulation journal · 2023Article
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThere is limited evidence regarding machine-learning prediction for the recurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF) after electrical cardioversion (ECV). This study aimed to predict the recurrence of AF after ECV using machine learning of clinical features and electrocardiograms (ECGs) in persistent AF patients.
methodsWe analyzed patients who underwent successful ECV for persistent AF. Machine learning was designed to predict patients with 1-month recurrence. Individual 12-lead ECGs were collected before and after ECV. Various clinical features were collected and trained the extreme gradient boost (XGBoost)-based model. Ten-fold cross-validation was used to evaluate the performance of the model. The performance was compared to the C-statistics of the selected clinical features.
resultsAmong 718 patients (mean age 63.5±9.3 years, men 78.8%), AF recurred in 435 (60.6%) patients after 1 month. With the XGBoost-based model, the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) were 0.57, 0.60, and 0.63 if the model was trained by clinical features, ECGs, and both (the final model), respectively. For the final model, the sensitivity, specificity, and F1-score were 84.7%, 28.2%, and 0.73, respectively. Although the AF duration showed the best predictive performance (AUROC, 0.58) among the clinical features, it was significantly lower than that of the final machine-learning model (p<0.001). Additional training of extended monitoring data of 15-minute single-lead ECG and photoplethysmography in available patients (n=261) did not significantly improve the model's performance.
conclusionsMachine learning showed modest performance in predicting AF recurrence after ECV in persistent AF patients, warranting further validation studies.
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.