Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39314696›Full record

ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2024

Ten quick tips for electrocardiogram (ECG) signal processing.

Davide Chicco, Angeliki-Ilektra Karaiskou, Maarten De Vos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Davide ChiccoDipartimento di Informatica Sistemistica e Comunicazione, Università di Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9655-7142
Angeliki-Ilektra KaraiskouSTADIUS Center for Dynamical Systems Signal Processing and Data Analytics, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Maarten De VosSTADIUS Center for Dynamical Systems Signal Processing and Data Analytics, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The electrocardiogram (ECG) is a powerful tool to measure the electrical activity of the heart, and the analysis of its data can be useful to assess the patient's health. In particular, the computational analysis of electrocardiogram data, also called ECG signal processing, can reveal specific patterns or heart cycle trends which otherwise would be unnoticeable by medical experts. When performing ECG signal processing, however, it is easy to make mistakes and generate inflated, overoptimistic, or misleading results, which can lead to wrong diagnoses or prognoses and, in turn, could even contribute to bad medical decisions, damaging the health of the patient. Therefore, to avoid common mistakes and bad practices, we present here ten easy guidelines to follow when analyzing electrocardiogram data computationally. Our ten recommendations, written in a simple way, can be useful to anyone performing a computational study based on ECG data and eventually lead to better, more robust medical results.

Indexed as

CardiologyECGElectrocardiographyGuidelinesMedical signal processingQuick tipsSignal processing

Identifiers

PMID39314696
PMCPMC11419615

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.