ArticleAnnals of noninvasive electrocardiology : the official journal of the International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrocardiology, Inc2025
Tracing Visual Expertise in ECG Interpretation: An Eye-Tracking Pilot Study.
Article in Annals of noninvasive electrocardiology : the official journal of the International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrocardiology, Inc, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of eye-tracking technology in electrocardiogram interpretation research.European journal of medical research · 2025Pooled it
- Eye-tracking biomarkers of clinical expertise in ECG interpretation: statistical and machine learning evidence.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Non-conscious detection of ST-segment elevation during physician ECG interpretation.Journal of electrocardiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVisual expertise is pivotal for accurate ECG interpretation. We aimed to identify and measure expertise-based differences in visual search patterns, cognitive load, and diagnostic accuracy during ECG analysis using eye-tracking technology.
methodsFirst- to third-year residents and board-certified expert cardiologists interpreted ECGs of patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome, while eye-tracking glasses recorded fixation count, duration, and pupil dilation. Diagnostic accuracy and cognitive load via NASA Task Load Index were analyzed. Heatmaps illustrated relationships between cognitive load, perceived workload, and self-assessed performance across experience levels and ECG task complexities.
resultsExpert readers interpreted ECGs significantly faster than residents (107.6 ± 32.8 vs. 205.31 ± 57.43 s; p < 0.001) and demonstrated higher diagnostic accuracy across all levels of task difficulty (p < 0.001). Eye-tracking analysis revealed that experts exhibited fewer fixations (67.7 ± 25.7 vs. 143.7 ± 29.9; p < 0.001) and longer fixation durations (3.9 ± 0.7 vs. 3.2 ± 1 s; p = 0.032) than residents. Experts also showed lower pupil dilation changes (4.8% ± 2% vs. 10.5% ± 4.2%; p = 0.015). Increased task difficulty was associated with greater pupil dilation, particularly among novices (mean pupil dilation for difficult tasks 13.4% ± 4.1% vs. 7.3% ± 2.3% for easy tasks; p = 0.008), indicating higher cognitive demand. Experts maintained superior self-assessed performance (8 ± 0 vs. 7 ± 1.2; p = 0.009) and reported lower perceived negative workload (4.5 ± 1.45 vs. 6 ± 0.55; p = 0.041).
conclusionsIn this pilot study, expert readers achieved faster and more accurate diagnoses, exhibiting more efficient visual search patterns and lower cognitive load. Pending external validation, our findings suggest that ECG training programs should focus on developing targeted visual techniques, cognitive efficiency, and adaptive coping strategies to enhance accurate interpretation.
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.