ArticleComputers in biology and medicine2025
Automated detection of non-physiological artifacts on ECG signal: UK Biobank and CRIC.
Article in Computers in biology and medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
introductionAn electrocardiogram (ECG) is commonly used in clinical practice. Poor data quality, artifacts, and misplacement of electrodes have to be identified before the clinical interpretation of ECG. We aimed to develop an algorithm to automatically identify ECG artifacts and lead misplacement. METHODS AND
resultsWe utilized 42,743 ECGs from UK Biobank (UKB; n = 42,743 participants; age 55±8 y; cardiovascular disease 1.2 %; diabetes 0.9 %; chronic kidney disease 0.5 %; ventricular pacing 0 %) for the algorithm development and 41,495 ECGs from the Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort (CRIC; n = 3912 participants; age 63 ± 11 y; cardiovascular disease 78 %; diabetes 56 %; chronic kidney disease 100 %; ventricular pacing 3.5 %) for external validation. We developed a fully automated algorithm to detect non-physiological ECG artifacts, such as high or low peak-to-peak amplitude, frequency-based outliers, and misplaced electrodes. In UKB, the algorithm demonstrated a sensitivity of 84.9 %, a specificity of 100 %, an ROC AUC of 0.924, and a Kappa statistic of 0.91. We observed 98.81 % agreement between ground truth and algorithm-identified non-physiological ECG artifacts, significantly (p < 0.00001) larger than the random agreement of 86.91 % expected at the observed 7.6 % prevalence. The misplacement of limb lead electrodes in UKB affected the Wilson Central Terminal. In CRIC, we observed an agreement of 94.90 %, which was significantly (p < 0.00001) better than by chance (93.27 % at the observed 5.3 % prevalence, including pacing artifacts), 16.8 % sensitivity, 99.3 % specificity, and an ROC AUC of 0.580.
conclusionThe fully automated algorithm can accurately detect ECG artifacts and potential lead misplacement, thus permitting automated quality control of ECG analysis. The code is provided at https://github.com/Tereshchenkolab/ECG-quality-control.
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.