SynthesisFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2025
Identification of atrial fibrillation using heart rate variability: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2025. 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.
- Atrial Fibrillation Detection from At-Rest PPG Signals Using an SDOF-TF Method.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Motion Artifacts Removal from Measured Arterial Pulse Signals at Rest: A Generalized SDOF-Model-Based Time-Frequency Method.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia and is associated with significant cardiovascular complications. Recently, artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms have leveraged heart rate variability (HRV) patterns to enhance the accuracy of AF identification. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of the literature by searching four major biomedical databases-PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library-spanning from their inception to December 13, 2024, following the PRISMA guidelines. We extracted data on true positives, false positives, true negatives, and false negatives from the included studies, which were then synthesized to evaluate sensitivity and specificity comprehensively. Results: Our final analysis included 12 diagnostic studies. Hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic modeling revealed excellent discriminative ability, with a pooled sensitivity of 0.94 and specificity of 0.97. In detecting AF, the AI model demonstrated exceptional performance (sensitivity = 0.96, specificity = 0.99, AUC = 1.00). Subgroup analyses revealed that both deep learning algorithms (sensitivity = 0.95, specificity = 0.98, AUC = 0.99) and multi-database studies (sensitivity = 0.96, specificity = 0.97, AUC = 0.99) demonstrated enhanced accuracy in AF identification compared to other approaches. Conclusion: Machine learning can effectively identify AF with HRV in ECG, especially in diagnosis and detection, with deep learning algorithms and multiple-databases outperforming other diagnostic methods. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, PROSPERO (CRD42025634406).
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.