ArticleHeliyon2024
A comprehensive review on efficient artificial intelligence models for classification of abnormal cardiac rhythms using electrocardiograms.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- SHAP-Based Feature Augmentation and Stacking Ensemble Learning for ECG-Based Serum Potassium Abnormality Prediction.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Integrating AI-Driven Diagnostics in Arrhythmia Care to Enhance Patient Outcomes: A Narrative Review.Cureus · 2026Review
- Minority class-aware multiclass arrhythmia detection using conditional GAN augmentation.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Bridging clinical knowledge and AI: an interpretable transformer framework for ECG diagnosis.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Study of the L-Carnitine Effect on Myocardial Bioelectrical Activity by Microelectrode Arrays and Artificial Intelligence Application.Journal of cardiovascular translational research · 2025Article
- Review
- Drug repurposing: Clinical practices and regulatory pathways.Perspectives in clinical researchReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Deep learning has made many advances in data classification using electrocardiogram (ECG) waveforms. Over the past decade, data science research has focused on developing artificial intelligence (AI) based models that can analyze ECG waveforms to identify and classify abnormal cardiac rhythms accurately. However, the primary drawback of the current AI models is that most of these models are heavy, computationally intensive, and inefficient in terms of cost for real-time implementation. In this review, we first discuss the current state-of-the-art AI models utilized for ECG-based cardiac rhythm classification. Next, we present some of the upcoming modeling methodologies which have the potential to perform real-time implementation of AI-based heart rhythm diagnosis. These models hold significant promise in being lightweight and computationally efficient without compromising the accuracy. Contemporary models predominantly utilize 12-lead ECG for cardiac rhythm classification and cardiovascular status prediction, increasing the computational burden and making real-time implementation challenging. We also summarize research studies evaluating the potential of efficient data setups to reduce the number of ECG leads without affecting classification accuracy. Lastly, we present future perspectives on AI's utility in precision medicine by providing opportunities for accurate prediction and diagnostics of cardiovascular status in patients.
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.