ReviewCureus2025
The Efficacy of Artificial Intelligence in the Detection and Management of Atrial Fibrillation.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting-Clinical, Demographic, and Intraoperative Predictors: A Multicenter Observational Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Exploring nurse- and allied health professional-led opportunistic atrial fibrillation screening with artificial intelligence-enabled devices in community and primary care.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- AI-Powered Precision: Revolutionizing Atrial Fibrillation Detection with Electrocardiograms.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Artificial Intelligence and ECG: A New Frontier in Cardiac Diagnostics and Prevention.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Artificial intelligence in atrial fibrillation: emerging applications, research directions and ethical considerations.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2026-04-16Concerns/Issues about Referencing/Attributions · Error in Text · Unreliable Results and/or Conclusions ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into medicine offers transformative potential, particularly in the detection and management of atrial fibrillation (AF). However, the intersection of AI and AF has not been comprehensively evaluated. This systematic review focuses specifically on the applications of AI in AF risk prediction, monitoring, and management. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed and Google Scholar using terms such as artificial intelligence, deep learning, machine learning, artificial neural networks, and AF diagnosis. Methodological quality and risk of bias were assessed using the JBI critical appraisal checklist for qualitative research. Of the 109 studies screened, 39 met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 19 studies focused on AI's role in AF risk prediction, while 20 studies addressed its application in monitoring and management. Machine learning models, including AI-ECG approaches such as the optimal time-varying machine learning model and the observational medical outcomes partnership common data model, demonstrated superior sensitivity and specificity compared to traditional models (Framingham, atherosclerosis risk in communities (ARIC), congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75, diabetes, stroke, vascular disease (CHADS-VASc), and cohorts for heart and aging research in genomic epidemiology model for atrial fibrillation (CHARGE-AF). Wearable devices, such as patch monitors and smartwatches, emerged as reliable, cost-effective, and noninvasive alternatives to implantable cardiac monitors for continuous AF detection and patient-centered management. Despite these advances, the reliability and consistency of AI-based tools remain variable across studies due to data heterogeneity and methodological inconsistencies. Identified gaps include the need for standardized, labeled datasets, robust validation through prospective clinical trials, and improved data governance frameworks to ensure reliability and reproducibility. In conclusion, AI holds immense potential for AF prediction and management, but addressing these challenges is essential for its integration into clinical practice.
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.