ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Delineation of 12-Lead ECG Representative Beats Using Convolutional Encoder-Decoders with Residual and Recurrent Connections.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Precise peak width estimation for solving key challenges in biosignal and spectral analysis.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Reconstructing 12-lead ECG from reduced lead sets using an encoder-decoder convolutional neural network.Biomedical signal processing and control · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The aim of this study is to address the challenge of 12-lead ECG delineation by different encoder-decoder architectures of deep neural networks (DNNs). This study compares four concepts for encoder-decoders based on a fully convolutional architecture (CED-Net) and its modifications with a recurrent layer (CED-LSTM-Net), residual connections between symmetrical encoder and decoder feature maps (CED-U-Net), and sequential residual blocks (CED-Res-Net). All DNNs transform 12-lead representative beats to three diagnostic ECG intervals (P-wave, QRS-complex, QT-interval) used for the global delineation of the representative beat (P-onset, P-offset, QRS-onset, QRS-offset, T-offset). All DNNs were trained and optimized using the large PhysioNet ECG database (PTB-XL) under identical conditions, applying an advanced approach for machine-based supervised learning with a reference algorithm for ECG delineation (ETM, Schiller AG, Baar, Switzerland). The test results indicate that all DNN architectures are equally capable of reproducing the reference delineation algorithm's measurements in the diagnostic PTB database with an average P-wave detection accuracy (96.6%) and time and duration errors: mean values (-2.6 to 2.4 ms) and standard deviations (2.9 to 11.4 ms). The validation according to the standard-based evaluation practices of diagnostic electrocardiographs with the CSE database outlines a CED-Net model, which measures P-duration (2.6 ± 11.0 ms), PQ-interval (0.9 ± 5.8 ms), QRS-duration (-2.4 ± 5.4 ms), and QT-interval (-0.7 ± 10.3 ms), which meet all standard tolerances. Noise tests with high-frequency, low-frequency, and power-line frequency noise (50/60 Hz) confirm that CED-Net, CED-Res-Net, and CED-LSTM-Net are robust to all types of noise, mostly presenting a mean duration error < 2.5 ms when compared to measurements without noise. Reduced noise immunity is observed for the U-net architecture. Comparative analysis with other published studies scores this research within the lower range of time errors, highlighting its competitive performance.
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.