ArticleScientific reports2024
Evaluating regression and probabilistic methods for ECG-based electrolyte prediction.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cardiac parameter estimation from electrocardiograms based on inversion of physical simulator behavior.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Sports Cardiology: Advancing Cardiovascular Screening and Diagnosis.Cureus · 2026Review
- AI-enhanced non-invasive monitoring of critical biochemical analytes in perioperative care: a review of signal processing and clinical applications.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Review
- Abnormality prediction and forecasting of laboratory values from electrocardiogram signals using multimodal deep learning.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Imbalances in electrolyte concentrations can have severe consequences, but accurate and accessible measurements could improve patient outcomes. The current measurement method based on blood tests is accurate but invasive and time-consuming and is often unavailable for example in remote locations or an ambulance setting. In this paper, we explore the use of deep neural networks (DNNs) for regression tasks to accurately predict continuous electrolyte concentrations from electrocardiograms (ECGs), a quick and widely adopted tool. We analyze our DNN models on a novel dataset of over 290,000 ECGs across four major electrolytes and compare their performance with traditional machine learning models. For improved understanding, we also study the full spectrum from continuous predictions to a binary classification of extreme concentration levels. Finally, we investigate probabilistic regression approaches and explore uncertainty estimates for enhanced clinical usefulness. Our results show that DNNs outperform traditional models but model performance varies significantly across different electrolytes. While discretization leads to good classification performance, it does not address the original problem of continuous concentration level prediction. Probabilistic regression has practical potential, but our uncertainty estimates are not perfectly calibrated. Our study is therefore a first step towards developing an accurate and reliable ECG-based method for electrolyte concentration level prediction-a method with high potential impact within multiple clinical scenarios.
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.